- (1.) Heard Sri K. Ajit, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Sri S.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 5 and Sri G.P. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4.
(2.) The petitioner is the wife of late Jagdish Singh who is stated to have executed a Will in her favour in relation to the land in dispute. The said land was put to auction and the respondents 6 and 7 are the auction purchasers. The auction proceedings were challenged under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 and ultimately the matter travelled up to the Board of Revenue. The revision filed by the petitioner was allowed by the Board on the ground that the auction proceedings were not in accordance with the Rules prescribed and the same being faulty, the auction was set aside with a further direction to the Collector to take steps for realization of the amount in accordance with law. The Board of Revenue also issued a direction that it will be open to the petitioner to clear all the dues within a month and in the event, the petitioner fails to do so, fresh auction proceedings can be resorted to. The auction purchasers were found entitled to the refund of the amount.
(3.) This order of the Board of Revenue dated 16.2.2006 came to be challenged by the auction purchasers in Writ Petition No. 17991 of 2006 (Ashok Kumar Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others). The petitioner was arrayed as respondent therein and shall file a counter-affidavit contesting the stand of the auction purchasers. The auction purchasers abandoned their said pursuit and the writ petition was dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the auction purchasers to receive their amount as directed by the Board of Revenue. Consequently, the auction purchasers abandoned their claim and the writ petition was dismissed upholding the order of the Board of Revenue dated 16.2.2006.;