JAYANT VASANTRAO DHOLE Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER AMRAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the orders dated 1/6/1992 passed by the Collector, Amravati, setting aside the auction dated 9/3/1992 where he was the highest bidder and its confirmation in appeal by the Additional Commsioner, Amravati divion, Amravati. Th Court has while suing Rule in the matter, granted interim relief and prohibited the owner i. e. Respondent No. 5 from creating any third party interest in the matter.

(2.) The property admeasuring 14,520 sq. ft. from Land Survey No. 2/2, total area 2 h. 27 R of Mouza Rasulpur was proceeded against by Respondent No. 4-Naib Tahsildar, morshi, for recovery of arrears of Rs. 81,618/-of State Government towards non-agricultural assessment. The auction sale was conducted on 09-03-1992 and bid of the petitioner at rs. 3,10,00/- was found to be higher. It was accepted by Respondent No. 4 - Naib Tahsildar and the petitioner, as required, immediately deposited l/3rd amount of Rs. 1,04,000. 00 in cash. The remaining amount was to be paid as per provions of Section 202 of Maharashtra land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Code). The bid of the petitioner was accepted by Respondent No. 4 on 9/3/1992 and he placed the papers before Respondent no. 3 - Sub-Divional Officer, Morshi, for confirmation. The petitioner states that on 12/3/1992, he approached Respondent No. 4 -Naib Tahsildar for accepting the balance amount but Naib Tahsildar communicated to him that the balance amount could be accepted only after confirmation of sale. When the proceedings were pending before Respondent No. 3 - Sub-Divional officer, Respondent No. 5 Society preferred Revion Application before respondent No. 2 - Collector, aga;. t auction proceedings which came to be regtered as revenue Revion No. RRC-71/yerla-1/91-92. The ground of attack in Revion was as the society was under liquidation, in view of provions of Sections 107 and 163 (2) of maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, the property could not have been subjected to auction and that the auction consideration was inadequate.

(3.) It appears that when these revion proceedings were pending before respondent No. 2 - Collector, Respondent No. 6, another co-operative processing society which claims to run the Ginning and Pressing Factory of Respondent No. 5 - Society on lease sought to deposit the government dues to the extent of rs. 81,618/- and amount of Rs. 15,500/- as commsion and amount of Rs. 1,000/- towards cost of auction proceedings, total amount of rs. 98,118/- with Tahsildar, Morshi. Accordingly, Respondent No. 6 forwarded a letter dated 24-03-1992 to Tahsildar, Morshi. Respondent No. 2 - Collector passed an order on 01-06-1992 and while rejecting the contentions raed by Respondent No. 5, it proceeded to accept the payment of Rs. 98,118/-made by Respondent No. 6 and hence set aside the auction sale in favour of the petitioner under section 210 (2) read with Section 207 of maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The petitioner challenged th order by filing appeal under Section 247 of the Code before the commsioner, Amravati Divion, Amravati, and the Commsioner has on 25-03-1996, dmsed said appeal. Thus, the petitioner has challenged both these orders in present writ petition.