N.K. Jain, C.J.--This writ appeal is filed against the order dt. 5th Feb.,.2002, in Writ Petn. No. 14292/1991 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition.

2. The necessary facts are:

M.P. Lakshman, appellant-petitioner, a coffee planter, is a partner in a firm along with one B.S. Nagaraj and carrying on business under the style of M/s M.P. Engineering Works. He filed a writ challenging the constitutional validity of Section 269UE(1) of the Act and for quashing the order dt. 13th June, 1991. The same was dismissed as stated. Hence this appeal for quashing the order of the learned Single Judge, dt. 5th Feb., 2002, and order dt. 13th June, 1991.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the intending purchaser is entitled to get the advantage as the order is to the effect that the auction is subject to result of the writ petition and the same will not prejudice the bona fide purchaser.

4. On the other hand, learned Departmental Advocate submits that the alleged intending purchaser has no right to get any further opportunity. Once after the modification of the order of this Court, the auction was completed and compensation was also paid to the ow