Contractual dues arising from a Theka (auction) for collecting fees for loading and unloading trucks in a cattle fair held on Zila Parishad land can be recovered as arrears of land revenue under Sections 159 and 161 of the U. P. Kshetra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961, read with the U. P. Zila Parishads (Recovery of Arrears of Tax and Rent on Land) Rules, 1975.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the certificate for recovery (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) issued by Atirikt Mukhya Adhikari, zila Parishad. Etawah in respect of Theka Transport Tehbazari, Vedpura Cattle Market 1986-87.

( 2 ) THE main question which arose for consideration is whether the contract dues (contract money) in auction bid accepted in favour of the petitioner for collecting money on account of fee realised for loading and unloading of the trucks in cattle fair held in the Zila Parishad land vested in the Panchayat can be recovered as arrears of land revenue, and can in such circumstances writ of certiorari be issued for quashing of request made by respondent to realise the amount through the Collector as arrears of land revenue or should the petitioner resort to filing of a civil suit.

( 3 ) IT appears that Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parishad. Etawah published an auction notice for the theka of Transport Tehbazari 1986-87 of the whole of village Vedpura in Dainik Deshdharam newspaper dated 8. 6. 1986 for auction on 12. 6. 1986 inviting intended bidders to take part in the auction. The total area included Plot Nos. 110a. 101. 112ka, 102ka, 112kha and l00ba and Plot nos. 89. 91, 92 and 92, as mentioned in para 2 of petition, situated at village Vedpura, district etawah. The petitioner in pursuance of auction notice Annexure-2 to the petition offered the highest bid of Rs. 7,00,000 in the auction which was held on 12. 6. 1986. It is further alleged that he has deposited 1/4th of the auction amount. There is no dispute that an approval letter was sent and Theka was accepted in favour of the petitioner on 19. 6. 1986 and the petitioner also deposited the balance amount of Rs. 5,25,000 in pursuance of letter, Annexure-3 to the writ petition within a week of the receipt of the letter. It appears that some litigation was started by one All Hasan as mentioned in paragraph 5 of the writ petition, vide Writ Petition No. 7006 of 1986 wherein it was ordered that Zila Parishad. Etawah shall not require the trucks which transport catties to and from plot Nos. 101a, 101, 112ka, 102ka, 103, 112kha and 100ba of village Vedpura in Mela area to pay Tehbazari and prohibiting placing of any barrier on etawah-Mainpurt road.

( 4 ) THE petitioner had full knowledge of this litigation. He further averred that the petitioner submitted a representation as mentioned in the writ petition that he has suffered a loss on account of realisation of money by All Hasan and prayed that compensation be given to him to the extent of Rs. 5,40. 000 and this amount be adjusted towards Theka amount. The petitioner has also mentioned in paragraph Nos. 11 and 12 that due to non-placing of barrier he was suffering loss on account of the litigation filed by one Indra Pal Yadav. In other words his plea is that he could not realise Tehbazari on account of orders passed by the Honble High Court in writ petition mentioned earlier. He further alleged that. various applications were submitted to the respondents for remission of the loss caused on account of aforesaid litigation and he sent another representation. It is further alleged in paragraph No. 20 of the writ petition that petitioner has paid Rs. 4,25,000. It is also alleged by the petitioner that Respondent No. 2 asked him to withhold a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 regarding loss suffered by the petitioner but it is surprising that the recovery of Rs. 2,75,000 was issued and coercive methods are used to realise the Theka money" despite representations regarding adjustment of the amount suffered by way of loss. The main plea of the petitioner is that this amount is not recoverable by way of arrears of land revenue as it is a contractual amount and there are various Division Benches decisions of this high Court that In such matters recovery certificate under U. P. Public Moneys (Recovery of dues) Act. 1972 read with Rules, cannot be issued