The order also stated that the sale to respondents Nos.
1 in this appeal, for the following orders a that the companyfirmation of the sale in pursuance of the auction held on 31 3 1956, be stayed b that they be given an opportunity to substantiate their case on the merits c that they be number evicted till the disposal of their case d that the lease granted to them be extended till end of the working season.
That the property was number liable to be sold but should be allotted to the appellants at its value did number exceed Rs.
136 of the Constitution is from an order passed on 20 4 1956, by the Chief Settlement Commissioner appointed under the Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation Act, 1954.
Thereafter on 6 4 1956 the appellants withdrew the appeal pending in the High Court at Bombay.
3 in this appeal, advertised that the salt pans should be sold by public auction on 6 1 1956.
On 31 3 1956, the property was put up to auction and Parvatibai Wadhumal and Kakanbai Tulsimal, respondents Nos.
On 23 12 1955, the Regional Settlement Commissioner, an officer appointed under the Act, who is respondent No.
It appears that on the same day the appellants were forcibly ejected from the property and respondents Nos.
The salt pans were evacuee property and formed part of the companypensation pool companystituted under the Act.
This lease was renewed from time to time, and on 2 12 1955, it was renewed for a period ending on 13 2 1956.
On 7 11 1950, a lease of the salt pans was granted to the appellants for a period of three years.
The Court however, refused to stay the sale further and only ordered that the sale was number to be companyfirmed for a week and expedited the hearing of the appeal.
On 2 2 1956, the lease to the appellants was renewed for the last time for a further period ending on 15 4 1956.
On 15 4 1956, the lease expired and thereafter on 20 4 1956, the Chief Settlement Commissioner made an order dismissing the application but giving the appellants 14 days time to remove the salt lying in the pans.
On 11 4 1956, the appellants made an application to the Chief Settlement Commissioner who is respondent No.
4 and 5 who offered a bid of Rs.
On 25 4 1956, the Managing Officer of Evacuee Property, also an officer appointed under the Act, and respondent No.
The appellants filed an appeal in the same Court from the order of dismissal and again applied for a stay of the sale.
226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the proposed sale on the ground that the value of the property did number exceed.
Thereafter, the appellants applied to this Court for leave to appeal from the order of the Chief Settlement Commissioner, dated 20 4 1956, and such leave was granted on 28 5 1956.
The High Court stayed the sale pending the hearing of the application.
There are certain salt pans in Wadala, Bombay, known as Salamati Salt Factory.
4 and 5 was companyfirmed and possession of the salt pans should be given to them forthwith.
4 and 5 were put in possession.
4, 40, 000 were declared the highest bidder.
The appellants moved the High Court at Bombay under Art.
226 of the Constitution came up for hearing and was dismissed.
50, 000.
They state that they did so as it involved disputed or companytroversial questions of fact as to the value of the property which would number have been decided by the Court in an application under Art.
4, 39, 000.
The sale had number till then been companyfirmed.
The Chief Settlement Commissioner granted a stay of the companyfirmation of the sale pending the hearing of the application.
Thereafter, the application under Art.
At the sale the appellants themselves had bid up to Rs.
The grounds on which this application was made were two, namely, Under S. 29 of the Act, the appellants who were in lawful possession of the property had statutory immunity from eviction for a period of two years.
