1. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner. The petitioner purchased the property in question at an auction held on 21,3.1990 by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation in exercise of its power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act. After the petitioner had obtained possession of the property, the first demand, which the petitioner received from the respondent District Industry Centre, was dated 9.4.1991 calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount due to District Industry Centre, Jodhpur, which was due to M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products as the property purchased by the petitioner was subject to second charge in favour of the Centre, for the loan of margin money advanced to M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products whose property the petitioner has purchased at auction conducted by the Rajasthan State Financial Corporation as aforesaid.

3. The petitioner disputed his liability to pay that amount on the ground that he has purchased the property only subject to liabilities payable to RIICO, RFC and RSEB, no other liability was made subject to auction and therefore, he is not liable to discharge debt payable by the original debtor.

4. In response to this, the petitioner was informed by the District Industry Centre that the sale agreement between the petitioner and the RFC contains a condition that he has to accept all other liabilities due to M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products and, therefore, he has purchased property subject to all the liabilities of the original owner of the unit and he is liable to discharge the debts of M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric under the agreement also.

5. This led to correspondence between the petitioner, Rajasthan State Financial Corporation and the DIC under which the RFC clarified to DIC that the petitioner's liability under the auction sale was to discharge the outstanding dues of Jodhpur Agric Products only to RIICO, RSEB and PHED and no other dues of M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products was made subject to the auction. The 'other dues', which has been initially written in the sale agreement was also deleted.

6. During the course of hearing the parties were directed to produce the auction notice and condition of sale advertised under which the auction took place, which justifies the contention of the petitioner atleast to the extent that properties were not sold subject to other liabilities as no such condition can be spelt out from the auction notice or the terms and conditions under which auction was being held.

7. Be that as it may, aggrieved with the action of District Industry Centre in refusing to grant permanent registration certificate to the petitioner as a small scale industry, which was necessary for him to avail other reliefs from different departments, unless he pays amount due from M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products, the present writ petition was filed with the following reliefs:

(i) direct the respondent No. 2 to grant permanent registration to the petitioner as S.S.I. Unit.

(ii) quash the impugned orders Annex. 6 dated 9.4.1991, 24.4.1991 or any other adverse order passed by the respondent No. 2.

(iii) hold that the respondents are not entitled to recover the margin loan given to erstwhile firm M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products from the petitioner.

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction to which the petitioner may be entitled to in the circumstances of the case may be passed.

(v) Costs of this writ petition may be awarded to the petitioner.

8. The reply was filed by the respondents on 2nd August, 1994 specifically taking the plea that the property in question was subject to second mortgage with the DIC, a Government department and it has right to enforce its security against the property purchased by the petitioner. The fact that property is subject to second mortgage has not been denied by the petitioner in rejoinder filed by them on 28th August, 2002.

9. In the first instance, the interim order was passed on 12th April, 1993 orde