Section 22(3) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act applies to sales of property in certificate proceedings, and the sale of the property of a person belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes without the written permission of the Revenue Officer is void.

G. B. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER, a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste, has impugned in this writ petition the orders of the Certificate Officer, the Additional District Magistrate exercising the appellate power and the Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Northern Division, exercising revisional power, annexed as Annexures 1,6 and 10 respectively to the writ petition in respect of a certificate proceeding started against the petitioner.

( 2 ) TO appreciate the contentions raised by the petitioner, it is necessary to briefly state the facts. Petitioner had taken some money as agricultural loan and the amount of loan was recoverable as land revenue in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act. Certificate proceedings were instituted for realisation of the amount due on the petitioner and as required under the provisions of S. 6 of the said Act, due notice was issued and served on the petitioner. But notwithstanding due service of notice, petitioner did not take any steps nor file any petition denying his liability. Thereafter the properties of the petitioner were attached and sale proclamation was issued for sale of the petitioner's holding No. 112 by public auction. But on the date fixed, auction could not be held and, therefore, a fresh proclamation was issued. Even on the next date, the sale could not be held. On 7-11-1977, petitioner himself filed a petition requesting the Certificate Officer to put all his lands in holding No. 112 of village Sahajpani to sell by public auction and the amount received be utilised for adjusting all the certificate dues against him. In accordance with the said request, a fresh proclamation of sale by public auction was issued on 27-12-1977 fixing 10-2-1978 as the date of auction in the office of the Revenue Inspector, Bongamunda. This proclamation was published in village Sahajpani and a copy of the same was also served on the petitioner. The property in question was put to auction on 10-2-1978 as scheduled and even the petitioner himself was present at the time of auction. This fact has been asserted by the Tahsildar who has filed the counter affidavit in this case on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 4. Opposite party No. 5 became the highest bidder, the bid amount being Rs. 10,000/ -. Thereafter, petitioner filed a petition that the properties to put to re-auction, but the said petition was rejected. The highest bidder (opposite party No. 5) deposited the entire amount as well as the poundage fee in shape of Court-fees and from the return filed by opposite parties 1 to 5, it is further apparent that all the certificate dues against the petitioner have been adjusted out of the bid amount. The certificate officer passed an order on 20-5-1978 to the effect that the certificate of sale would be issued to the highest bidder after obtaining necessary formal permission from the Revenue Officer and S. D. O. , Tetilagarh. He, however, directed that in the meantime delivery of possession be given to the highest bidder. The legality of this order was challenged unsuccessfully by way of an appeal and the appellate authority confirmed the order of the Certificate Officer as per Annexure-6 and a revision against the same was also dismissed. Opposite party No. 5 filed an affidavit in this Court stating that possession of the lands has been delivered to him, obviously in pursuance of the order of the Certificate Officer, referred to earlier.

( 3 ) MR. Murty, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the auction purchaser (opposite party No. 5) not being a person belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and the petitioner being a person belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the sale of his property without the written permission of the Revenue Officer is void under sub-sec. (3) of S. 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act and, therefore, opposite party No. 5 does not derive any title on the basis of the said sale and the order of the Certificate