1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH J.--Leave to appeal has been sought, against disimissal by the High Court, of petitioners' Writ Petition which had arisen out of a case of consolidation of holdings.
2. ' The petitioners' grievance in the High Court met with an assertion by the Board of Revenue in a report sent to the High Court in reply to the petitioners' constitutional petition; stating therein that the petitioners were even by that stage holding 2 kanals and 2 marlas in excess of their entitlement.
3. ' When confronted with this situation learned counsel tried to explain that the High Court should not have taken note of something which was found in a report to the High Court and not in the orders impugned before it.'
4. We having perused the report are of the view that there is no inconsistency between the order and the report. After hearing him on this aspect of reply we agree with the High Court that no case had been made out for exercise of discretionary writ jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused.