1. Pursuant to the judgment and order of remand passed by a Division Bench in LPA No. 475/99 (R), I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bihar State Financial Corporation.

2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the sale order dated 20-2-1998 as contained in Annexure 4 to the writ application, whereby the assets of the petitioners factory had been sold and the same was purchased by the respondent No. 4.

3. The petitioner, a physically handicapped person, was sanctioned a sum of Rs. 50, 000.00 by the respondent State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). Although the loan amount was sanctioned in 1980 but out of the sanctioned amount a sum of Rupees 9800.00 was disbursed in 1981 and further a sum of Rs. 6000.00 was disbursed in 1982. Accordingly, a total sum of Rs. 15,000.00 as against the total sactioned amount of Rs. 50,000.00 was disbursed by the Corporation.

4. The case of the petitioner is that because of the non-disbursement of the entire amount he could not start the unit and repeatedly made request to the Corporation for disbursement of the amount. The Corporation did not disburse the entire sanctioned loan amount rather disbursed amount of Rs. 15,000.00 multiplied by addition of interest and other charges and it reached to Rs. 1.41 lacs in the year 1995. The Corporation for the recovery of the said amount put the unit in auction in the year 1995. The petitioner, therefore, contended that the action of the respondent-Corporation in auctioning the unit is illegal and mala fide.

5. In the counter affidavit the respondent - Corporation took the stand that on the failure of the petitioner in payment of the alleged dues of the Corporation the unit was advertised for auction sale in the newspaper namely, Hindustan Times, Patna dated 14-12-1995 and it was ultimately auction sold in 1998 and a sale order was issued on 20-2-1998 in favour of the respondent No. 4. This Court in terms of the judgment and order dated 5-10-1999 allowed the writ application and quashed the sale order dated 20-2-1998 on the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 within four weeks and thereafter rest of the amount shall be paid as per the calculation sheet that shall be served by the Corporation to the petitioner. For better appreciation the operative portion of the judgment and order is reproduced herein below :-

"Without going into further details of the matter the admitted position is that the advertisement for sale of the unit was issued on 14-12-1985 fixing 31-12-1985 for auction sale in presence of the promoter. Admittedly auction was not done on 31-12-1985. However, on the basis of aforesaid advertisement dated 14-12-1985 unit was sold to respondent No. 4 and sale order was issued on 20-2-1998. On this sole ground alone I am of the opinion that the entire procedure adopted by the Corporation in auction sale of the unit of the petitioner is vitiated in law. The contention of the petitioner that the unit was not auction sold rather it was sold to respondent No. 4 on negotiation has not been controverted by the respondent. On that ground also the sale order issued by the Corporation in favour of the respondent No. 4 is bad in law. Besides the above petitioner who is handicapped person was disbursed only a sum of Rs. 15,000.00 and for that amount the Unit worth rupees more than 6 lacs has been auction sold, is also not justified.Having heard to the facts and circumstances of the case I allow this application and quashed the sale order dated 20-2-1998. This order shall be subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 within four weeks from today and thereafter the Corporation will serve the detailed calculation of amount which ultimately became due against the petitioner. The said calculation sheet shall be served upon the petitioner within one month fr