JUDGMENT :

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

1. By this Special Civil Application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

“10. The petitioner therefore most respectfully prays to this Hon'ble Court that :

(a) Be pleased to declare the section 95, 161 and 162 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 as ultra vires the Constitution of India, 1950.

(b) Be pleased to declare Notification NO..Ghkh-82-2002-nsv-16-2002-3875-ch (3) dated 7.10.02 as ultra vires the Constitution of India, 1950 and the Parent Act (The Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961).

(bb) Be pleased to declare Notification No..Ghkh-82-2002-nsb-16-2002-3875-ch (1) and .Ghkh-82-2002-nsb-16-2002-3875-ch (2) dated 7.10.02 as ultra vires the Constitution of India, 1950 and the Parent Act (The Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).

(c) Be pleased to declare Notification dated 29.3.2012, 16.08.2012, 23.08.2011 and 4.4.2011 of Gujarat Urban Cooperative Banks Federation as ultra vires the Constitution of India, 1950 and The Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961.

(d) Be pleased to quash and set aside the auction dated 2nd March 2012 conducted by sale officer of the respondent bank.

(e) Pending Admission, Hearing and Final Disposal of this petition, respondent No.4 (purchaser) be restrained /injuncted/ prohibited to further transfer the subject property (2, Nilkanth Deepkunj Society, Paldi, Ahmedabad).

(f) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to grant status quo qua the subject property (T.P. No.3, Final Plot No.2, Nilkanth, Deepkunj Society, Paldi, Ahmedabad).

(g) Costs of this petition be awarded.

(h) Such further and other relief, order or direction which may be just, fit, proper and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the Petition.”

2. The case made out by the petitioner may be summed up thus:-

2.1 The petitioner is one of the legal heirs of late Manguben Ratilal Thakkar, who was the guarantor of a loan account viz. M/s. Laxmi Cotton Trading Company with the respondent No.2-bank. The liability of M/s Laxmi Cotton Trading came to be crystallized and the same has attained finality up to the Supreme Court of India. Thus, the initial order passed by the Board of Nominees has attained finality. Lavad Suit No.870 of 1982 was filed before the Board of Nominees which was dismissed. Being dissatisfied, the plaintiff as well as the defendants challenged the same before various forums and ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the decree of the Board of Nominees.

2.2 Manguben died on 25th April 2010. After the death of Manguben, the name of the petitioner was mutated in the village form and, thus, according to the petitioner, she being one of the heirs and legal representatives, no auction of the property owned by Manguben could be held without giving her a notice and without complying with the procedure laid down by the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

2.3 There were two loan accounts, namely, M/s Laxmi Cotton Trading Company and M/s Shivlal Chaturdas. The petitioner had received auction notice pertaining to the auction of the property as the legal heir of Manguben (TP No.3, Final Plot No.931/3 2, Nilkanth Deepkunj Society, Paldi, Ahmedabad) dated 11th November 2011. The said auction never took place and was settled and as such, the bank did not proceed any further.

2.4 The petitioner has not received any auction-notice qua the property described for M/s. Laxmi Cotton Trading Company. The petitioner was not aware of any auction and even after the conclusion of the so-called illegal auction, the petitioner was never informed or communicated about the auction being conducted or the amount fetched from such auction.

2.5 The petitioner is a housewife with very limited knowledge of law and law relating to auction. It has come to the knowledge of the petitioner through her