VIVEK CHAUDHARY,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsels for parties.
(2.) Both the writ petitions are filed by the petitioner, Smt. Santosh Kumari, challenging the order dated 23.06.1992 passed by the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow rejecting the objection of the petitioner filed under Rule 285-I of U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Rules, 1952 as well as entire sale and auction proceedings held on 16.07.1990 and for quashing of all other consequential proceedings and orders, if any. The first and foremost ground raised by petitioner is as to whether the Naib Tahsildar has jurisdiction to hold an auction of a property for recovery of public dues under the provisions of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act) and U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952 (U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Rules).
(3.) It is admitted between the parties that auction proceedings are held by Naib Tahsildar. Submission of learned counsels for petitioners is that auction could be held only by a Collector or by an Assistant Collector, who is duly authorized by the Collector to hold the said auction on his behalf and by no other person. Further submission is that Naib Tahsildar, only a subordinate revenue official, who is not given any power under the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act or Rules to hold such an auction, cannot hold it. The auction seriously prejudices the rights of the owner of the property, who, even in distress, is entitled for the best price of his property, which can only be achieved by a properly held auction through a responsible officer and such a serious matter cannot be left in the hands of subordinate revenue officials.;