KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.--The land in dispute measuring 8 Kanals and 6 Marlas described more fully in the petition was earlier given to the respondents herein, but was later cancelled for default of relevant payment on their part. Thereafter, it was then given to the present petitioners but the respondents ultimately got it restored in their favour from the learned Settlement Commissioner, vide his orders dated 5-11-1973 and 20-12-1973.
2. The present petitioners challenged the aforesaid orders by means of a constitutional petition 256-11/74 but without any success as the same was dismissed by the High Court on 28-4-1976. The High Court took note of the various legal or other types of points raised before it but taking the view that the respondents being rightful original transfarees of the land against their duly verified claim, it was not a fit case for its interference if the land ultimately stood restored to them irrespective of certain defect in not depositing the amount in time. The petitioners have come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the aforesaid order of the High Court to this Court.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also gone through the record. We agree with the High Court that in view of the reasons given in the impugned order, it was justified in not considering it as a fit case warranting interference. The order of the High Court is substantially just and fair and we find no ground to grant leave to appeal in this case.
4. The result is that this petition is consequently dismissed hereby.