JUDGMENT :

1. Though the matter is listed under ‘Orders’ category but with the joint consent of the counsels for both the parties, the matter is being finally heard and decided today itself.

2. The instant writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction

i. The impugned sale declaration dated 10.3.2021 (Annex.8) and impugned order dated 10.3.2021 (Annex.3) may kindly be quashed and set aside;

ii. The entire proceedings initiated against the humble petitioner may kindly be ordered to be dropped;

iii. The respondents may kindly be directed to grant time to the humble petitioner to deposit the debt amount as per the provisions of the Act of 1974 and the auction proceedings which have been undertaken by the respondents may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside;

iv. Any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in the favour of humble petitioner.”

3. The brief facts which gave emergance to the instant writ petition are that the petitioner took agricultural loan amounting Rs. 27 Lakhs in the year 2012 from Punjab National Bank, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as ‘Respondent No. 2’), while mortgaging his land situated at Khasra No. 647, 885/1, 888 admeasuring 10.40 hectares in total.

4. The petitioner could not repay the loan amount within time, due to which the Respondent No. 2 preferred an application dated 06.09.2018 (Annexure-1) under Section 13 (1) of the Rajasthan Agricultural Credit Operations (Removal of Difficulties) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1974') for recovery of the amount of Rs.31,21,847/-.

5. Then the petitioner submitted an application dated 22.09.2020 (Annexure-2) for depositing the loan amount.

6. The attachment warrant dated 30.12.2019 (Annexure-4) was issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as ‘Respondent No. 1’), in which, the measurement of land was mentioned as 10.40 hectares and thereafter, in pursuance of the attachment warrant dated 30.12.2019 issued by Respondent No. 1, the Tehsildar, Revenue, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as ‘Respondent No. 3’), submitted the report dated 05.03.2020 (Annexure-5) which showed the measurement of land as 16.28 hectares.

7. The Respondent No. 1 vide order dated 07.09.2020 (Annexure- 6) issued a sale declaration of land measuring 10.40 hectares. Subsequently, an application dated 02.03.2021 (Annexure-7) was submitted by Respondent No.2 to Respondent No. 1, requesting the change in land measurement as 16.28 hectares instead of 10.40 hectares, upon which the Respondent No. 1 vide order dated 10.03.2021 (Annexure-8) issued a sale declaration of land measuring 16.28 hectares.

8. The petitioner thereafter submitted a legal notice dated 16.06.2021 (Annexure-9) after he came to know about this development of increasing the measurement of land.

9. The land was auctioned by Respondent No. 3 on 26.03.2021 in pursuance of the sale declaration dated 10.03.2021 (Annexure-8) and the report of auction proceedings (Annexure-10) was submitted by Respondent No.3.

10. Hence aggrieved by the sale declaration dated 10.03.2021, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition.

11. The learned counsel for the private respondent – Respondent No.4 raised preliminary objection that the petitioner has an efficacious statutory alternate remedy available under Section 13 (2) of the Act of 1974, which reads as under:

“13. Recovery of dues of a bank through a prescribed authority— (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, an official of the State Government notified by the State Government as the prescribed authority for the purpose of this section may, on the application of a bank, make an order on or any agric