HANSRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manoj Kumar Chandel, the learned counsel for the borrower, respondent no. 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1,2 and 3.

(2.) The petitioner is an auction purchaser, whose bid was accepted by the revenue authorities in auction proceedings. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that respondent no. 4 took an agricultural loan from a Bank. He failed to pay the amount, and accordingly, recovery proceeding was initiated and the revenue authorities issued a citation dated 05th May, 2012 for the recovery of Rs. 1,90,395/-. Respondent no. 4 did not pay the amount as per the recovery citation, and consequently, the tractor of respondent no. 4 was attached in proceedings initiated under the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. The said tractor was put to auction on 19th June, 2013, on which date, the petitioner's bid was accepted being the highest. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 16,250/- being 1/4th of the bid amount at the fall of the hammer and deposited the balance amount of Rs. 48,700/- on 29th June, 2013, on which date, the auction was confirmed by the revenue authorities. Inspite of confirmation of the auction, upon deposit of the entire amount, the tractor was not released, and accordingly, the auction purchaser has filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus commanding the revenue authorities to release the tractor forthwith.

(3.) It transpires that after the tractor was auctioned, the borrower, respondent no. 4 approached the writ court by filing writ petition no. 34759 of 2013, which was disposed of by an order dated 1st July, 2013 permitting the borrower to pay the entire amount as per the citation in various installments. Direction no. 5, as contained in the order dated 1st July, 2013, is relevant, which is extracted hereunder: