Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - After having failed in his attempt before the Writ Court, seeking refund of Rs.31,25,000/- the appellant-writ petitioner has approached this Court in the instant Letters Patent Appeal.

2. Heard.

3. Mr. V.P. Singh, the learned Senior counsel for the appellant referring to E-auction notice dated 01.03.2016 for sale of the residential property MIG-D-120 at Harmu Housing Colony, contends that the respondent- Allahabad Bank made a representation to the public at large which was patently false and thereby the appellant was misled. E-auction held pursuant to notice dated 01.03.2016 was illegal and therefore, the bid amount deposited by the appellant must be refunded by the respondent-Bank. It is further contended that after the respondent-Bank fully recovered the secured debt from the borrower, forfeiture of Rs.31,25,000/- by the Bank on the ground that the appellant-successful bidder has failed to deposit the balance 75% bid amount by the stipulated date, would nothing but, be unjust enrichment.

4. Per contra, Mr. P.A.S. Pati, the learned counsel for