- (1.) -THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 19th May, 2005 (Annexure-3) by which the auction proceedings dated 21st March, 2005 in respect of the sale of immovable property situated at A-53, Sector-80 Phase-II, NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar for a sum of Rs. 20,70,000/- in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar and he has been directed to take refund of the amount deposited by him.
(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that one Ku. Anu Sharma, respondent No. 5 could not make the payment of the outstanding dues of the electricity department. The said amount was to be recovered as arrears of land revenue and recovery certificate had been issued against the said respondent No. 5 Ku. Anu Sharma. The advertisement was made for auction of the aforesaid immovable property of Ku. Anu Sharma, respondent No. 5. The petitioner also participated in the auction held on 21st March, 2005 after completing the terms and condition for participation in the auction. Being the highest bidder for a sum of Rs. 20,70,000/- for the entire plot, measuring 450 square meters, he was asked to deposit l/4th amount of the auction bid on the same day. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 5,17,500/- on the same day. The impugned order was passed on 19th May, 2005 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, respondent No. 2 cancelling the auction proceedings without giving any reason therein and a direction was also issued to the petitioner to take refund of the amount so deposited by him. Hence this writ petition.
(3.) THE Court, after noticing various steps which had been taken for sale of the immovable property for a sum of Rs. 20 lacs and odd qua alleged recovery of the electricity dues of Rs. 1,03,290/- (Rupees One Lac Three thousand Two Hundred Ninety Only) as well as in view of the other facts on record, required the Standing Counsel to produce the original record and to explain as to under what circumstances, the Sub Divisional Magistrate had the competence to cancel the auction. The records were accordingly produced before this Court and a counter-affidavit was filed by the then Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dadri wherein it has been stated that the powers of the Collector has been conferred upon the Sub Divisional Officers under a notification dated 5th December, 1968 in exercise of powers under section 3 (2) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter called the 'act' ). It has further been mentioned that after the cancellation was made by the Sub Divisional Magistrate in exercise of vested power on 24th May, 2005, the petitioner made an application before the District Magistrate on Janta Divas on which instructions were issued to the Additional District Magistrate Ghaziabad to enquire into the matter. The Additional District Magistrate thereafter called for the relevant files and prepared a report which was sent to the District Magistrate vide letter dated 6. 5. 2005. The report specifically mentioned that the auction was cancelled by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Thereafter, a second report was submitted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 13th May, 2005 before the District Magistrate.;