' SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the learned Judge in Chambers whereby the writ petition filed by Muhammad Bashir Khan was dismissed.
2. Muhammad Bashir Khan was permanent Lambardar of adjoining Chak No, 135-A/9-L. He applied for the allotment of Lambardari grant situated in Chak No, 135/9-L, which was allotted on 7-5-1968 and its possession was delivered on 29-5-1968. Respondent No,2, Lambardar of Chak No, 135/9-L, where the disputed plot is situate, filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) on 1-10-1968. He then challenged this appellate order by filing revision application, which was allowed. The petitioner filed Constitution petition against the said order, which was dismissed by the impugned judgment.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had been appointed Lambardar in place of Rajkumar, evacuee Lambardar of Chak No 135-A/9-L, who held the land in question in his capacity as Lambardar and therefore he is also entitled to hold the same land. This contention is misconceived as a person appointed in place of an outgoing Lambardar can hardly make such a claim. The allotment of land to a Lambardar is governed by the memos, and policy laid down by the Government, One such memo, has been referred to by the learned Judge in Chambers bearing No,5657-41650 CGI dated 23.114963, according to which the Lambardar of one Chak should not be accommodated in the neighbouring Chak, The petitioner is not a Lambardar of Chak No, 135-A/9-L and therefore he could not be accommodated in that Chak, We do not find any force in the petition and refuse to grant leave.