1. ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-The petitioners are aggrieved by the refusal of the High Court to grant them an order for the maintenance of status quo during the pendency of their petition in regard to the allotment of certain State lands situate in Bahawalpur District. According to the petitioner, the lands in dispute were allotted to their on lease for a period of 10 years from Rabi 1970 to Kharif 1979, but the Collector of the District was threatening to dispossess them. After calling for a report from the Collector, a learned Judge of the High Court has admitted the petitioner's writ petition to full hearing, but has not granted their prayer for the maintenance of status quo as he was not satisfied the petitioners were in possession of the disputed lands.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the High Court has fallen into error in thinking that there was no material on the record to show the possession of the petitioners, as there was a Roznamcha entry to the effect that the petitioners had been given possession of the lands in 1969/1970. He further submits that even in a report submitted by the Collector to the High Court the date of the alleged dispossession of the petitioners is not given, and, therefore, it cannot be said that they had been dispossessed.
3. We see no merit to these submissions. If the petitioners were, indeed, claiming to be in possession of the disputed lands on the date of filing the writ petition, namely, the 9th of May 1978, it was their duty to satisfy the High Court, by the production of the relevant revenue record, that they were in such possession, but they failed to do so. Even before us no such documentary evidence has been produced. The report submitted by the Collector clearly shows that the lands in dispute have since been allotted to the ejected tenants of the Sheikhupura District, who have already been put into possession. Under these circumstances the High Court was right in refusing the petitioners' prayer for the maintenance of status quo during the pendency of the writ petition.
4. The petition therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed.