' SH. IJAZ NISAR, J.---These petitions are directed against the judgment, dated 5-5-1999, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Writ Petitions Nos.3379 to 3384 of 1994.
2. The facts, in brief, are that Fayyaz Ahmad respondent filed suits for the ejectment of Abdul Aziz etc., petitioners herein, on the ground of default in the payment of rent. After recording evidence the Assistant Collector, Wazirabad, by order, dated 31-12-1990 ordered the ejectment of the petitioners. The petitioners filed appeal before the Collector Wazirabad, which were dismissed on 29-6-1991. The judgments/ decrees were challenged in revision under section 7(2) of the Punjab Land Reforms (Procedure for Ejectment Suits) Rules, 1977 before the Commissioner (Revenue), Gujranwala which, too, were dismissed on 11-2-1992. The second revisions were filed before Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore, who accepted the same vide order, dated 8-11-1993.
The said order was challenged in the High Court in the Constitutional petitions by the respondents- landlords. By the impugned judgment the High Court declared the orders of the Member, Board of Revenue to be illegal, without jurisdiction and of no legal effect, and affirmed the order of ejectment passed by the Assistant Collector, Wazirabad has affirmed in appeal and the first revision by the Commissioner.
' The sole ground, which prevailed with the learned High Court, was that no second revision was competent before the Board of Revenue. Hence these petitions.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners had cited Locas v. S.M. Nasim, Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue (PLD 1984 SC 227) wherein it was held by this Court that the provisions in sub-para (7) of para. 25, of the Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (MLR No,115) empowered the Board of Revenue to call for the records of any of proceedings at any time of its own motion or otherwise which was pending or in which a Collector or Commissioner had passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself regarding correctness, legality or propriety of such proceeding or order.
4. Leave is granted to consider the question of maintainability or otherwise of the second revision in the Board of Revenue in the present circumstances. Till the disposal of the appeals, status quo shall be maintained as per revenue record.