Mr. V. Ramasubramanian, J.

All these petitions are by an auction purchaser, seeking a review of common order passed by the Honourable Division Bench on 04.07.2014 in a batch of six writ appeals and eleven writ petitions taken up together for disposal.

2. Heard Mr.G.R.Swaminathan, learned counsel appearing for the review applicants, Mr.Raja Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader(Taxes) appearing for the official respondents and Mr.K.Govindarajan, learned Counsel appearing for the assessee Company which is a contesting respondent.

3. The first respondent in all these review petitions was an assessee at the hands of the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madurai, who is the second respondent herein. They were granted the benefit of interest free Sales Tax Deferral Scheme, for a period of nine years from 29.05.1994 to 28.05.2003.

4. Even before the entire duration of the Deferral Scheme was over, the Department claimed that the assessee became ineligible and that therefore they must pay arrears of Sales Tax of Rs.45,67,264/-. Accordingly, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated and a notice was issued on 30.07.2004. The notice was challenged by the assessee in W.P(MD)No.1964 of 2004. Another writ petition was filed in W.P(MD)No. 4842 of 2004 by the assessee challenging the cancellation of the agreement entered into under the Deferral Scheme.

5. In both writ petitions, a conditional order of stay was granted. As against the conditional order, an appeal was filed by the assessee, but the same was merely disposed of enlarging the time to comply with the condition.

6. Since the assessee did not comply with the condition, the writ petition was dismissed on 09.07.2007 and the District Collector issued a notice in Form 7-A for the sale of the assets of the assessee.

7. Unfortunately, the auction was conducted on 19.03.2008 within seven days from the date of issue of public notice on 12.03.2008. In the auction so held, the review petitioner was declared as the highest bidder. He was issued with a letter of confirmation on 26.03.2008 and it seems that he was urged to remit the amount on the very same day. Form VIII Sale Certificate was issued on 21.04.2008 and the department last no time and handed over the possession on 23.04.2008.

8. The sale notice was challenged by the assessee in W.P(MD)No. 4378 of 2008 on the short ground that between the date of issue of public notice for sale namely 12.03.2008 and the date of auction sale namely 19.03.2008, there was no time as stipulated under the Rules. Apart from the Company, the Directors of the Company also filed independent writ petitions challenging the sale.

9. By a common order passed on 17.09.2008, the writ petitions filed by the Company and two of its Directors, in W.P(MD)Nos.3847, 4378 and 5324 of 2008 were allowed by a learned Judge of this Court, holding that the procedure contemplated under the Revenue Recovery Act, has been observed more in breach than in compliance and that therefore the land owner's property was illegally sold.

10. As against the said order, the auction purchaser filed three writ appeals in W.A(MD)Nos. 600 to 602 of 2008. The Government also filed three writ appeals in W.A(MD)Nos.46 to 48 of 2009. Interestingly, the assessee itself filed two appeals with regard to a small portion of the order, but later withdrew the same. Thus, there were six writ appeals, three at the instance of the Government and another three at the instance of auction purchaser arising out of a common order passed by the learned Judge setting aside the sale notice.

11. In the meantime, the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Arrears) Act, was passed by the State Legislature on 25.07.2010. The Act was intended to be a "Samadhan Scheme". The assessee filed an application for settlement of arrears and the same was accepted by the Department. The assessee paid the amounts as prescribed under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Arrears) Act, 2010. The competent au