By the Court.—Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for State respondents.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by a recovery certificate dated 21.3.1996 issued by the National Small Industries Corporation Ltd to the District Magistrate, Allahabad to recover Rs. 3,97,188/- advanced to the petitioner for purchase of ‘Asian Automatic Offset Printing Machine’; ‘Isothim Fartor Reesin Ongrissive Machine’ and ‘3 H.P. Motor 4440 Bolt’ under U.P. Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972. It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner purchased an Automatic Offset Printing Machine and a Cutting Machine on ‘Hire Purchase Basis’ through the agency of respondent-Corporation under an agreement. According to the schedule and the calculation sheet, the entire amount of Rs. 7,10,031/- was agreed to be paid by the petitioner in 13 years in instalments of Rs. 50,371/- per annum. The first instalment was to fall due after one and half years of issuing the R/R.

3. The machines supplied were alleged to be highly defective and were received after inordinate delay. It is alleged that the R/R was issued on 31.3.1990 but the machines were delivered only in the last week of May, 1990. The respondent corporation did not rectify the defects. The petitioner, however, continued to partly pay the amount and that as against Rs. 2,50,000/- approximately upto 31.3.1996 a sum of Rs. 3,85,200/- was paid. The corporation illegally and arbitrarily and on account of some annoyance with the father of the petitioner, who was also supplied defective machines, and had to be taken back by the Corporation, issued recovery certificate giving rise to this writ petition.

4. An amendment application was filed on 9.12.2001 to amend the writ petition by adding paragraph 20-A to 20F alleging that though the entire amount of loan was liquidated, nevertheless, taking advantage of the fact that there was no interim order, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate attached the immovable and movable properties for several lacs of rupees and sold them out for Rs. 60,000/- on 8.3.1997. The properties were not movables as the Off Set Printing Machines were embedded to earth. The sale was confirmed on the same day violating the procedures prescribed in the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The automatic off set printing machine was valued for not less than Rupees three lacs and cutting machine was valued at not less than Rs. 30,000/-, and thus the sale consideration was illusory. Prior to the sale, the petitioner had paid Rs. 5500/- on 4.11.1996; Rs. 5500/- on 23.11.1996/-; Rs. 11,000/- on 18.11.1996/- and Rs. 27,500/- on 4.8.1997 and had thus deposited Rs. 49,500/-. The amendment application was dismissed on 5.3.2002. A restoration application was filed on 23.4.2002 and is pending. There is no good reason given to recall the order. The restoration application is accordingly rejected.

5. We also find that the amendment application filed on 19.12.2001 seeks the prayers to quash the auction sale held on 8.3.1997, and the sale certificate dated 10.9.1997. The application does not give any reason to explain the laches to challenge the sale in favour of a third party, after a period of four years.

6. In the counter affidavit of Shri K.G.S. Moorthy, Development/Law Officer of National Small Industries Corporation Ltd., it is stated that the petitioner had applied for purchase of Automatic Off Set Printing Machine on ‘hire purchase basis’, under one of the schemes of the Corporation in the year 1988. The application was processed and acceptance was communicated. The total cost in the acceptance letter dated 16.8.1988 was Rs. 3,84,800/-, which was a tentative offer. The petitioner had to refund the amount with interest totalling Rs. 7,10,032/-. The amount was also specified under the agreement to be paid in instalments of Rs. 48,864/-. Subsequently the costs of the machine were reduced to Rs. 6,75,006/- and the amount of i