33 of the Act.
The appellant who was displaced person made the highest bid of Rs.20,000, it was provisionally accepted and he deposited one fifth of the amount at the companyclusion of the auction, but he failed to deposit the balance amount.
The respondents filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Punjab Haryana High Court challenging the order of Shri Rajni Kant dated February 6, 1970 as well as his subsequent order extending time till February 28, 1970 and also for issue of a direction to the authorities to finalise the auction sale held in their favour on January 17, 1969.
At that auction sale Sohan Lal and Sunder Lal, respondents who are also displaced persons made their highest bid for Rs.27,025 and they deposited 20 of the amount at the companyclusion of the auction.
Aggreived the appellant has preferred this appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court.
This plot was put to auction sale on August 24, 1959.
Meanwhile the appellant preferred an appeal against the order dated 2.10.1968 cancelling the auction sale before the Asstt.
Thereafter the property was put to auction sale on January 17, 1969.
Since numberrules had been framed for the disposal of the urban agricultural property the Central Government companyld number lawfully provide for sale of the urban agricultural land by executive directions.
A learned Single Judge after hearing the parties dismissed the petition.
The appellant preferred a Revision Petition before the Chief Settlement Commissioner but that too was dismissed on August 13, 1969.
The appellant again failed to deposit the amount within time, companysequently Settlement officer by his order dated 2.10.1968 cancelled the auction sale made in appellants favour.
Admittedly the appellant deposited the remaining auction price by February 28, 1970.
The Managing officer therefore cancelled the auction sale.
On a Revision Petition filed by the appellant, the Chief Settlement Commissioner by his order dated March 30, 1968 set aside the order of the Managing officer and allowed time to the appellant to deposit the balance of purchase price by May 30, 1968.
Thereafter the appellant made a petition under sec.
From the Judgment and order dated 14.10.1971 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.
Settlement officer, but the appeal was rejected on 2.4.1969.
14 of the Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation Compensation Act, 1954.
On a Letters Patent Appeal a Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal set aside the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, and quashed the order of Shri Rajni Kant granting time to the appellant to deposit the balance amount of the sale price under sec.
63 of 1971.
The Division Bench directed the authorities to finalise the auction sale held in respondents favour.
Consequently auction sale held on August 24, 1959 was illegal.
set aside the order cancelling the auction sale held on August 24, 1959 and granted 15 days time to the appellant for depositing the balance of the purchase price by his order dated February 6, 1970 with a companydition that on failure to deposit the balance of the auction price the petition shall stand dismissed.
8 and sec.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
33 of the Displaced Persons Compensation Rehabilitation Act, 1954 hereinafter referred to as the Act before the Central Government.
168 situate in Jalandhar City, an evacuee property was included in the companypensation pool under Sec.
There is numberdispute that after cancellation of the auction sale held in appellants favour, the property in dispute was again put to auction sale on January 17, 1969 and at that auction sale Sohan Lal and Sunder Lal respondents were the highest bidders.
Rajinder Sacchar, Naunit Lal, Kailash Vasdev and P.R. Ramesesh for the Appellant.
The appellant again failed to deposit the amount within time, but on a request made by the appellant Shri Rajni Kant extended time till February 28, 1970 for depositing the remaining amount of purchase money.
2062 of 1972.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SINGH, J. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of a Division Bench of Punjab Haryana High Court setting aside order of a Single Judge and also the order made by the Central Govt.
granting extension of time to the appellant to deposit purchase price in companynection with the auction sale dated August 24, 1959 held in appellants favour, and directing the Rehabilitation Department to take further proceedings regarding auction sale held in favour of the respondents.
Minocha and Mrs. Veena Minocha for the Respondents.
