RAM LAKHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER VARANASI DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the Commissioner dated 26.3.1992 passed under Rule 285(I) of the U.P.Z.A.& L.R. Rules, 1952 (in short the Rules).

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner being auction purchaser is that certain loan were taken by Muneshwar the father of respondent nos. 2 and 3 and one Udai Raj Singh from Union Bank of India. Since they were unable to pay back their loan, property in question was put to auction on 28.4.1988. The petitioner participated in the auction proceeding by bidding Rs. 1,35,000/ - for the said property which was the highest offer. As per the aforesaid Rules the auction money was deposited with the concerned authority and on 28.5.1988 the said auction sale was confirmed in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, it appears that respondent nos.2 and 3 claiming themselves to be the legal heirs of Munenshar, who had unfortunately died, filed objection before the Tehsildar that they had no knowledge of the aforesaid auction as the father of respondent nos. 2 and 3, who was the loanee had expired. The said application was filed under Rule 285(I) of the aforesaid Rules. The Commissioner while considering the application passed the order impugned dated 26.3.1992 on the ground that no notice was given to the heirs of the deceased loanee and, therefore, the entire proceedings were vitiated.

(3.) PLEADINGS have been exchanged between the parties in this matter.