M. S. H. QURESHI, J.-A consolidation scheme confirmed by the Collector (Consolidation), Depalpur, on 15-3-1973 became subject-matter of litigation. After a revision petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Member (Consolidation), Board of Revenue. Punjab, on 12-7-1978, they invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court. Their case was that Killa No. 3/2 of Square No. 63 which was a garden should have been given to them or in the alternative they should have been compensated for it. The writ petition was dismissed in limine on 16-9-1978 on the view that at the time of the consolidation operations the garden was not in existence as such the question of the petitioners' entitlement to it or of compensation for it did not arise.
2. Learned counsel attempted, by reference to Khasra Girdawaris, for the years Rabi 1976 and Kharif 1977, to show that Killa No. 3/2 of Square No. 63 is a garden. He, however, had no document to show that it had been a garden in 1973 which was the relevant time. The learned Member (Consolidation), Board of Revenue, Punjab, had found that the garden was a recent creation and had not been in existence when the consolidation operations had stated in the village. This being so, the High Court had rightly rejected the petitioners' plea. The petitioners' holdings had been consolidated at two places against previous three and, as found by the learned Member (Consolidation). Board of Revenue, Punjab, the shape of their new area was not awkward. The parties had already agreed that the land be distributed without class of soil.
3. In these circumstances we find no merit in this petition for leave to appeal and accordingly dismiss the same.