KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J -It is not necessary to go into the lengthy details of the stages through which this case passed and it will be sufficient for our purpose to mention that- the-petitioner claims the land in dispute as being a family member of his maternal-father (Muhammad Boota), to whom this land was allotted allegedly for his` ownself as well as for the petitioner. Having failed at the departmental level the petitioner ultimately filed a constitutional petition being W. P. 562- R/74 but without any success as it was dismissed by the High Court on 30-6-1979. The petitioner has come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the aforesaid order to this Court.
2. We have heard the learned counsel at some length and also go through the paper book. The High Court has found that the allotment aforesaid was cancelled as far back as 2-2-1957 and as the petitioner never challenged that order, it was too late in the day to take exception to the same at such a late stage. Learned counsel submitted that in fact their was no such order dated 2-2- 1957, and in this context be was not called upon to challenge an order which according to high existed nowhere. This pie was attended by the High Court and was repelled with reference to the attending evidence and it was held that such an order was in fact passed and the failure of the petitioner to challenge it cannot be ignored due to the type of the excuse put forward by him.
Learned counsel then tried to argue that such a land could only be given to a Jammu & Kashmir refugee, and as such should have been given to him as be is a Jammu & Kashmir refugee. It was, however, conceded that the respondent is also a Jammu & Kashmir refugee and apart form the fact, that this point was not raised in the High Court in this form, even otherwise, it could not clothe the petitioner with an preference against the respondent. The order of the High Court in our opinion is well reasoned, well supported by the relevant record and the law applicable In these circumstances, the present petition has no merit and is dismissed hereby.