' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-This, petition for leave to appeal arises out of an urban settlement case regarding a plot. The petitioner was found in possession of about 1 Kanal and 7 Marlas and the respondent No, 2 about 1 Kanal and 6 Marlas parts thereof. These parts have been transferred to them on basis of their respective possession. The remaining part, i,e, about 4 Kanals has been ordered to be auctioned. The petitioner's effort to obtain this part also having failed in the High Court, he has now-sought leave to appeal to this Court.
' Learned counsel has in the outset given up the case against respondent No,
2. His contention regarding the remaining part is that the entire plot having been "allotted" to the petitioner and he being admittedly in possession of a substantial part of it the settlement authorities had no option but to transfer the entire plot (subject of course to the concession made for respondent No, 2 now) regardless of the question of possession.
It is not necessary to examine the legal point noted above as according to the findings which were affirmed by the High Court, the petitioner was not allotted the entire plot. The approach of the settlement authorities to transfer the plot on the basis of possession and assumption that the allotment was also of the part in possession of the petitioner, does not suffer from any legal infirmity and is unexceptionable. Nor there is any other justification for this Court to interfere with the findings of fact on questions of fact regarding allotment and possession. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused.