R.M. Sahai, J. - (1.) THE only question that arises for consideration in this petition is if the auction proceedings of the land of Petitioner, confirmation of which has been stayed by this Court, for arrears of certain loans taken by him, are in accordance with law.
(2.) FROM various allegations mentioned in writ petition its reply in counter -affidavit specially paragraph 7 it appears to be admitted that in 1981 after deducting amount paid by Petitioner total amount outstanding against him was approximately Rupees nine thousand. It is alleged in paragraph 9 of the petition that Respondent No. 4 i.e, Tahsildar, who was annoyed with him, without issuing any notice of demand got the Petitioner's sugar -cane crop, standing on the plots mentioned therein, sold. Even if averments in respect of annoyance are ignored there is no reply in counter -affidavit if any notice of demand was served on Petitioner at any time before attaching or selling his property. The procedure to recover arrears of land revenue is provided in U.P. Zamindari Abolition Act, 1951. Section 279 provides for recovery of arrears as land revenue by various modes provided therein. Section 280 requires the Tahsildar to issue writ of demand on defaulter as soon as the arrears of land revenue becomes due. It also empowers him to issue a citation to the defaulter to appear and deposit the arrears on the date specified therein. If the defaulter does not pay the arrears then Section 291 permits his arrest and detention. In addition to it Section 282 empowers the Collector to attach and sell the property of defaulter. But the arrest and detention or attachment and sale could take place only if the defaulter does not pay after a notice of demand has been issued and served. Jurisdiction to proceed under Sections 281 and 282 is dependant on compliance of Section 279. That is the condition precedent. In absence of service of notice of demand the Collector or Tahsildar could not proceed to attach and sell the property. Such procedure is violative of even principle of natural justice. As property of Petitioner was attached and sold without compliance of mandatory provision of law, it cannot be maintained.
(3.) IN the result, this petition succeeds and is allowed. The auction held of Petitioner's property on 22 -1 -1982, is quashed. The Petitioner shall be entitled to its costs, which is assessed at Rupees one thousand.;