This writ petition by the legal heir of a Judgment Debtor whose property was brought to public auction sale in execution of an Award that the Judgment Debtor had suffered under section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short ‘the Act’) in Award No.596/1992-93 for a sum of Rs.98,000/- with interest which though has become final, the auction sale for execution of the said Award is nevertheless being questioned and seeking for setting aside the sale held on 23.7.1993 by filing an application under rule 38(5) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 (for short ‘the rules’) and having failed in such an attempt not only before the authority which examined the application under rule 38(5) of the rules but also before the revisional authority – the State Government in exercise of its power under section 108 of the Act who has dismissed the revision in terms of order dated 20.04.2005 passed in Revision Petition No.CMW 15 CAP 2001 (copy at Annexure-B) this writ petition.

2. The present writ petition which is the fifth round of writ litigation before this court is for questioning the legality of the auction sale within the parameters of an application under rule 38(5) of the rules and for scrutiny before this court in the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the order reaching this court through the revisional authority who has confirmed the order of rejection of the application under rule 38(5) of the rules filed by the petitioner.

3. The revisional authority itself has passed the impugned order in the fourth round of exercise of revisional powers under section 108 of the Act and on all occasions the revision petition has been dismissed by the revisional authority.

4. The present writ petition involves the examination of the legality or otherwise of an order passed under rule 38(5) of the rules within the scope of judicial review of administrative/quasi judicial orders under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition also involves the question as to what extent and with what degree of probity the mater is required to be examined in the supervisory jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. While the endeavour of the writ petitioner a person claiming as one of the legal heir of the deceased Judgment Debtor whose property is undisputedly sold in a public auction dated 23.7.1993 in to wriggle out of the sale and to save the property, it is the effort on the part of the auction purchasers – respondents 6, 7 and 8 who claim their interest to sustain the auction sale in their favour by the sale officer functioning under the provision of the rules and with the contention that while there was no illegality much less any irregularity or material irregularity that has affected the auction sale, the subsequent improvement of the purchased property over the past fifteen years definitely comes in the way of upsetting the auction sale at this point of time and therefore the writ petition should be dismissed.

6. The brief facts not much in controversy leading to the above writ petition in the fifth round is by the writ petitioner claiming as one of the legal heirs of the original petitioner and original claiming under the original writ petitioner – the Judgment Debtor has its genesis in one Sri. Gopalakrishna Bhat Borrowing Certain Amount From The Fifth Respondent – Mahalakshmi Co-operative Bank Limited, Udupi and the Bank having raised a dispute under section 70 of the Act before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies having acted as an Arbitrator and which had resulted in an Award dated 23.2.1993 passed in case No.596/1992-93.

7. It is for execution of this award, the recovery proceedings had been initiated by the Bank as against the property belonging to the Judgment Debtor, namely, five cents of garden land in Shivalli Village of Udupi Taluk of the erstwhile Dakshina Kannada District.

8. There