IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.7351 of 2011 Date of Decision : July 13, 2011. Satbir Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Surinder Singh Duhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2010 (Annexure P-2) whereby his application under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereafter referred to as `the Act'), to provide a separate path to his agricultural land has been dismissed by the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar, being the Competent Authority, would reveal that at the time of consolidation which took place in the village in the year 1975- 76, the agricultural land owned by the petitioner was duly connected with CWP No.7351 of 2011 [2] the canal path. The petitioner moved an application under Section 42 of the Act after a long span of time to provide him an exclusive separate path. After obtaining the report from the revenue authorities, the Competent Authority has come to the conclusion that there is no justification for the petitioner to seek an exclusive separate path. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the Akshajra which also reveals that the petitioner's agricultural land is duly connected with the canal path. No interference with the finding of fact returned by the Prescribed Authority is thus called for. Dismissed. July 13, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE