G.P.Mathur, J. - (1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying that proceedings for attachment dated 5.9.2001 and the auction held on 20.9.2001 be quashed and a writ of mandamus be issued directing respondent No. 2 not to confirm the auction proceedings conducted on 29.1.2001. A further prayer has been made that a writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents to show ho w the amount of Rs. one crore twelve lacs has been arrived at and how the property worth Rs. 24 lacs was sold for a sum of Rs. 8 lacs.
(2.) We have heard Mr. Puneet Chaturvedi and Mr. B .B. Paul for the petitioner, Mr. Atiq Ahmad Khan for respondent No. 1, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and have perused the record.
(3.) It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner is sole proprietor of M/s. Sudha Dychani Industries, dated in G-15 UPSIDC Industrial area, Site B, Mathura which was granted a loan of Rs. 15.87 lacs by the U.P. Financial Corporation (for short UPFC) between 1987 and 1989. The petitioner could not repay the loan according to terms of the agreement. It is averred in paragraph 8 of the writ petition that the unit of the petitioner was sealed in December, 1991, but subsequently it was released on payment of Rs. 1.50 lacs. The UPSC again took possession of the unit in December, 1992. The petitioner requested for regaining the possession of the unit and in that connection, a one-time settlement was arrived at on 1.9.1994, copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Under the terms of the settlement, the petitioner had to pay Rs. 20 lacs. The first deposit of Rs. 6 lacs was to be made by September, 1994 and the last deposit of Rs. 7 lacs by July, 1995. The petitioner did not comply with the terms of this settlement, and did not deposit the amount. It appears that the petitioner again made aproposal for one-time settlement which was accepted by the UPFC and it was communicated by a letter dated 17.9.1996 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition). Under this settlement, the petitioner was required to pay Rs. 4 lacs by September, 1996 and the last instalment of Rs. 4 lacs by September, 1997. Annexure-6 to the Supplementary affidavit shows that the petitioner gave a cheque of Rs. 4 lacs but the same was dishonoured. The UPFC thereafter sent a letter to the petitioner on 9.12.1996 to deposit Rs. 8 lacs by December, 1996. It was also mentioned in the same letter that if the amount was not deposited the one-time settlement approved in September, 1996 shall be cancelled. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did not deposit the amount. It is also not in dispute that there are outstanding dues against the petitioner and the same are being recovered now under the provisions of U.P. Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act. It is averred in paragraphs 13 and 14 of the writ petition that the ancestral properties of the petitioner situated at 392, Gujrana Gali, Mathura and 825, Chaubachacha Mohalla, Mathura were attached and were auctioned on 20.9.2001. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the attachment and auction of the aforesaid properties of the petitioner.;