SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment dated 19-12- 1977 of the Lahore High Court dismissing the Constitutional petition of the petitioners wherein they had challenged the order dated 31-1-1978 of the Board of Revenue.
2. The controversy between the parties which has given rise to this petition was whether two of the sales made by petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, which were evidence by mutations attested on 23-3-1962 and 15-11-1960, were hit by Martial Law Regulation 64 for the reason that after the sales the vendors were left with an area less than that of a subsistence holding. The Board of Revenue found that the vendors had sold their entire holding and for that reason the provisions of Martial Law Regulation 64 were not attracted. The High Court refused to interfere with this finding on the round that it was one of fact. The petitioners have now seek leave to appeal from this Court to call in question the orders of the ,High Court and the Board of Revenue.
3. There can be no doubt that the High Court was right in not interfering with the finding of the Board of Revenue that the petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 had sold their entire holding. It is also to be noticed that petitioner No. 1 did not figure in the sales and as such he had no locus standi in the matter. Petitioners Nos. 2 arid 3 had clearly not come to the High Court with clean hands. At no stage during the proceedings before the Revenue authorities or in the High Court they had made an offer to refund the prices which they have received from respondents Nos. 1 and 2. It was thus a case where they wanted to keep the money and also get the land back. It is, therefore, not a fit case where this Court should grant leave to appeal to the petitioners.