Revisional authorities cannot cancel long-settled auction transactions of bona fide purchasers based on alleged minor procedural lapses after an inordinate delay, especially when no fraud or loss to the public exchequer is proven and the initial proceedings were conducted with administrative approval.

Order

1. By way of the present batch of writ petitions, the petitioners have laid challenge to the legality, propriety, and correctness of the impugned order dated 18.06.2019 passed by the learned District Collector, Chittorgarh, in Revision Case Nos.65/2018, 47/2018, 49/2018, 51/2018, 52/2018, 71/2018, 12/2018, 48/2018, 54/2018, 32/2018, 15/2018, 38/2018, 42/2018, 37/2018, 17/2018, 20/2018, 68/2018, 45/2018, 35/2018 63/2018, 28/2018, 73/2018, 25/2018, 21/2018, 61/2018, 70/2018, 30/2018, 72/2018, 66/2018, 41/2018, 36/2018, 67/2018, 26/2018, 44/2018, 23/2018, 60/2018, 62/2018, 29/2018 and 34/20118 whereby the revision petitions preferred by respondent No.3 under Section 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act of 1994’) came to be allowed, resulting in the cancellation of the pattas and sale-deeds executed in favour of the petitioners.

1.1. Since all the writ petitions emanate from the same impugned order, involve identical questions of law and facts, and pertain to a common controversy arising out of the same auction proceedings conducted by the Gram Panchayat, this Court has deemed it expedient, appropriate, and in furtherance of judicial discipline and consistency to club, hear, and decide all the petitions together by a common order.

2. The facts giving rise to the present lis, succinctly stated, are that the Gram Panchayat, Satkhanda, in exercise of its statutory powers and in consonance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1996”), issued a public auction notice duly published in a widely circulated newspaper, inviting bids for the sale of sixty-three residential plots, each measuring 30×45 feet, situated in Araji No. 918/1848 of village Satkhanda. The public auction was scheduled to be held on 22.12.2011 and 23.12.2011.

2.1. Pursuant to the said auction notice, the petitioners, along with other interested participants, deposited the requisite security amount of ₹10,000/- and participated in the auction proceedings in a transparent and competitive manner. Upon conclusion of the auction, the petitioners emerged as the highest and successful bidders for the respective plots. It is significant to note that the auction fetched prices substantially higher than the prevailing District Level Committee (DLC) rates, thereby ensuring maximum financial benefit to the Gram Panchayat.

2.2. Prior to the conduct of the auction, the Gram Panchayat had scrupulously complied with all statutory requirements. Vide communication dated 20.09.2011 (Annexure-2), the Gram Panchayat sought approval from the Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Nimbaheda, for the proposed auction scheme. In response thereto, the Development Officer, vide order dated 03.10.2011 (Annexure-3), accorded approval to the scheme and directed the Gram Panchayat to proceed strictly in accordance with Rules 142 to 163 of the Rules of 1996. Public notice was duly published, objections were invited from the general public, and no objections were received warranting any interference.

2.3. After successful completion of the auction proceedings on 22.12.2011 and 23.12.2011, the Gram Panchayat, vide letter dated 27.12.2011 (Annexure-4), forwarded the auction proceedings to the Panchayat Samiti, Nimbaheda, seeking approval of the sale. The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Nimbaheda, after due consideration, granted approval vide order dated 11.01.2012 (Annexure-5) and directed the Gram Panchayat to proceed further in accordance with Rule 167 of the Rules of 1996.

2.4. Consequent upon the aforesaid approvals, registered sale-deeds were executed in fav