1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought against the dismissal by the High Court, of petitioners Constitutional petition. It had arisen out of a case of inheritance regarding evacuee property.
2. ' As stated by the learned counsel, Roop Singh was the transferee displaced person. After his death the question of inheritance arose. He had two sisters Mst. Ladli and Mst. Bhurian, a widow and a paternal nephew. The present dispute is between the successors-in-interest of Mst. Bhurian and the last mentioned two heirs. Learned counsel further stated that initially Mst. Ladli and Mst. Bhurian were recognized as sisters of Roop Singh; but, on an inordinately delayed review application Mst.
3. Bhurian was excluded from inheritance. An Additional Commissioner who allowed respondents' revision against the Collector's decision held that Mst. Bhurian was not the sister of Roop Singh.
4. Learned counsel stated in this behalf that this finding of fact would not be used against the petitioners because the original review and subsequent revision filed by respondents side were without jurisdiction. Accordingly the petitioners filed a writ petition in the High Court and the same having been dismissed, leave to appeal has now been sought.
5. ' Arguments raised in the High Court and their treatment in the impugned order are reproduced below:-- "The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Additional Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the order of the Collector and that the finding of the Additional Commissioner that Bhurian was not the sister of Roop Singh, was factually incorrect.
6. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned order.
7. "I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that since the order dated 19-9-1969 was passed by the Collector, therefore, the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) was quite competent to entertain appeal against that order. The question whether Mst. Bhurian was the sister of Roop Singh or not, is a question of fact. The learned Additional Commissioner has applied his conscious mind to the facts and circumstances and has given sound and cogent reasons in support of the conclusion arrived at by him. The contention raised by the learned counsel also requires investigation which cannot be done by this Court while sitting in writ jurisdiction. The learned Additional Commissioner (Revenue) has not flouted the provisions of relevant law."
8. ' We asked the learned counsel to substantiate the petitioners' claim that Mst. Bhurian was the sister of Roop Singh. He; however, insisted that the proceedings before the Additional Commissioner were incompetent.
9. The writ jurisdiction of the High Court is discretionary. The learned Judge dealt with the strength of the petitioners' case on merits. We do not find it a fit case for exercise of discretion in so far as the findings of fact are concerned. Learned counsel remained unable to satisfy us on the merits of the case. Accordingly, it is not a fit case for leave to appeal which is hereby refused.