1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioner; against an interlocutory order of the High Court refusing to implead him as a respondent on his request, in a case arising out of Land Reforms. He claims to be a tenant on the land in question which, according to him, is the subject-matter of the said Reforms. His further claim is that if the law, as he interprets it, is observed he will ultimately get the ownership of certain piece of land in this case as a result of the said Reforms. That being so, he sought to be impleaded as a respondent in the pending case.
2. Learned Judges in the High Court took the view that the main case is still being processed and that the petitioner not having suffered any grievance he was neither an aggrieved person nor a necessary party. Be that as it may, we with respect are of the view that in the background and circumstances of the case and the allegations being made by the petitioner, it will be helpful to the High Court if, when hearing the main Writ Petition, the petitioner is also afforded an opportunity of hearing. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make available to the High Court, at the time of the hearing of main petition, the assistance of a counsel. That done it is hoped and expected that the petitioner's counsel will be afforded opportunity of hearing. With these observations this petition is disposed of. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.