JUDGMENT - GAVAI B.R., J.: - By way of present petition, the petitioners challenge the order dated 30-5-1989 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur in Revision Case No. MRC-8/Khapa-1/85-86 vide which the Additional Commissioner has set aside the order dated 17-4-1985 passed by the Collector and directed confirmation of auction sale dated 27-12-1975.

2. The factual back ground in short giving rise to the present petition is as under :-

The Industries Officer, Nagpur addressed a letter to the Collector, Nagpur for recovering an amount of Rs. 5000/- from the petitioner No. 3 (original respondent No. 2) as arrears of land revenue as he had not paid the loan of same amount to the Government. The petitioner No. 3 had mortgaged the agricultural land admeasuring 10.46 acres as security. The Tahsildar, Saoner registered a case being Case No. 31/B-109/65-66. Vide order dated 10-10-1975 the Tahsildar, Saoner issued a proclamation for attachment of the property. On 27-12-1975 Naib tahsildar conducted auction and the highest bid of Rs. 25,000/- was accepted. The respondent No. 3 herein had deposited ¼ amount, i.e. Rs. 6250/- on the said date. On 23-1-1976 the petitioner No. 3 sold the property to the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 for consideration of Rs. 28,000/- with a view to make outstanding payment. On 24-1-1976 the Tahsildar accepted Rs. 13,272/- from petitioner No. 3 and passed a valid receipt. On 27-1-1976 the respondent No. 3 filed an application before the Tahsildar for confirmation of sale on the basis of auction held on 27-12-1975. The Tahsildar, Saoner by an order dated 4-2-1976 held that objection of respondent No. 3 was not tenable as he was only auction purchaser and held that the purpose of attachment was served. The respondent No. 3 herein went in appeal before the S.D.O. who by his order dated 12-8-1976 maintained the order of the Tahsildar. Being further aggrieved, the respondent No. 3 went in appeal before the resident Deputy Collector who by an order dated 13-1-1978 dismissed the appeal with a direction to the S.D.O. to pass specific order of setting aside the sale. The respondent No. 3 went in revision before the Additional Commissioner and the Additional Commissioner vide order dated 12-1-1980 remanded the case for decision by S.D.O. in accordance with the provisions of section 208 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Vide order dated 17-5-1982 the S.D.O. passed an order setting aside the order of the sale on the ground that there was no issuance of fresh proclamation under section 195 after postponing the sale of 24-11-1975 to 27-12-1975 and that the requirement of section 202 was not complied with as entire amount of purchase money was not deposited. The order passed by the S.D.O. was challenged before the Collector, who vide his order dated 17-4-1985 confirmed the order of S.D.O. Being aggrieved thereby the respondent No. 3 preferred a revision before the Additional Commissioner, who by the impugned order dated 30-5-1989 has allowed the revision of respondent No. 3 and quashed and set aside the order of the S.D.O. The petitioners being aggrieved thereby, approached this Court by way of present petition.

3. Initially, the original land-owner Narayan Nagorao Shende was impleaded as respondent No. 2. However, vide order dated 22-8-1991 he was transposed as petitioner No. 3.

4. Heard Shri R.K. Deshpande, with Shri Bhandarkar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Kankale, learned A.G.P. on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Shri S.P. Palshikar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3.

5. Shri Deshpande submits that the learned Additional Commissioner has grossly erred in setting aside the well-reasoned order passed by the S.D.O. which was confirmed by the Collector, Nagpur. He further submits that the learned Additional Commissioner has grossly erred in reversing the order of setting aside the auction sale. He submits that in view of section 195 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document