SHAFI-UR-REHMAN, J.-The petitioners have filed an application for taking proceedings under section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act ,against the five respondents.
2. The petitioners claiming to be in occupation of State land had challenged their threatened ejectment from the same by a constitutional petition. The petition was dismissed for non- prosecution on 2$-2-1981 and the application for its restoration also failed on 16-3-1981. The petitioners then filed a civil petition seeking leave to appeal against the refusal to restore their constitutional petition. On 21-3-1981 an order of status quo was passed on their application. It is said that the status quo so ordered was violated by the opposite-party on 30-3-1981 when interference with the possession of the petitioners took place.
3. We find from the document filed that cross criminal cases have been registered at police station Toba Tek Singh with regard to the occurrence which has been made the subject-matter of the contempt petition. As the subject-matter of both the proceedings would be identical though the order to be passed ultimately will be materially different a -parallel inquiry is not called for. We consider that there being other proceedings going on which afford better opportunities for determination of question of facts of possession, trespass and damage, physical and personal and of property, we decline to proceed in contempt. The petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.