The provisions of Rules 285-D and 285-E of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952, are mandatory and in the event of default, the sale becomes a complete nullity.

( 1 ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks the quashing of the order passed by the Collector on 7-4-1976 and by the Additional Commissioner on 11-6-1976 confirming the sale of his property. The facts are these. The petitioner carried on grain business as commission agent. For the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 the Sales Tax Officer, Orai, made ex parte assessments on him creating a liability of Ms. 16,000/-for each of these two years respectively. The petitioner filed appeals against those assessment orders and deposited a part of the amount of tax for each of these two years. As for the balance ammount the papers were forwarded to the Collector for realisation as arrears; of land revenue. The petitioners plots Nos. 403 (area 401 acres) and 507 (area 1. 12. acres), of village Udatpura were attached. The sale proclamation, was issued on 4-3-1975 and the auction sale took place on 21-3-1975. Sri, mantoley alias Mantai, respondent No. 5, offered highest bid of Rs. 13,000/- at that auction. That bid was accepted and he deposited Rs. 2,000/-on that very day and the balance of 25 per cent. of the sale price, that is Rs. l,250/- on the following, day. The petitioner filed, an objection under rule 285-J of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules (hereinafter, referred to as the Rules) before Collector Jalaun, on 14-4-1975. It was contended by the petitioner in, that objection that he had not been given any notice of attachment and sale of the aforesaid plots and that the sale could not have been made unless prior sanction of the Commissioner, Jhansi division, Jhansi, had been obtained. It was also contended that no citation or warrant had been, issued, for recovery of the amount and lastly that the auction-purchaser had not deposited one-fourth of the auction, money as required under the Rules.

( 2 ) THE objection was dismissed by the Collector, Jalaun by his order dated 7-4-1976. Aggrieved the petitioner filed a revision which was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner, Jhansi, on 11-6-1976. It may be mentioned that the Collector Jalaun confirmed the sale on 7/-4-1976, itself. The balance amount of the auction money was deposited, by respondent No. 5 sometime thereafter. The petitioner seeks the quashing of these orders and further prays for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the plots in dispute by withdrawing attachment.

( 3 ) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been filed.

( 4 ) THE facts which we have narrated above are not disputed.

( 5 ) IT was submitted before us on behalf of the petitioner that the sale of the disputed plots in favour of respondent No. 5 was nullity and non est inasmuch as 25 per cent, of the amount of the bid was not deposited immediately after the bid was accepted and secondly that the full amount of purchase money was not paid by the purchaser on or before the 15th day from, the date of the sale, as required by Rules 285-D and 285-E of the Rules. Counsel for respondent No. 5, on the other hand, urged before us that the sale having been confirmed, cannot be challenged in this writ petition and apart from that the petitioner-judgment-debtor, did not file any objection against the sale under Rule 285h or Rule 285-I and hence cannot challenge the sale by means of this writ petition,

( 6 ) AFTER considering the respective submissions, we find, that there is considerable substance in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner. We may refer to the relevant Rules. Rule 285-A says that every sale under Sections 284 and 286 of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms act, shall be made either by the Collector in person or by an Assistant Collector specially appointed by him in this behalf. Sale can be made only after expiry of at least thirty days from the date on which the proclamation under Rule 282 was issued. The Collector may, from, time to time, postpone the sale also, Rule 285b and 285c are not relevant