Anna Ram vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. SB C W Petition No.252/2006 Date of Order: 03.04.08 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS None for the petitioner/s. Mr.Rajesh Choudhary for the respondents. In this case, on 27.11.07 nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner, again on 29.11.07 nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner , on 05.12.07 nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner , on 24.01.08 nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner, on 28.01.08 nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the case was ordered to be listed for dictation of order. Today, nobody is appearing on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, I deem it just and proper to decide this case on merit. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged Annx.3 dated 16th December, 2005 whereby the respondent Bank has proceeded to auction the property of petitioner because earlier in the writ petition filed by the petitioner , compromise was arrived between the parties but after passing order by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in SBCW Pet. No.490/2004 and 2234/2004 dated 28.05.04 the petitioner himself violated the compromise and the condition of compromise. Therefore, the respondent Bank proceeded to auction the property for recovery. The learned counsel for the Bank argued that in this case the petitioner himself violated the terms and conditions of compromise and, therefore, there was no option left with the Bank, except to take action in accordance with law for recovery of loan. Therefore, the auction notice Annx.3 is perfectly in consonance with law. I am in full agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Bank, because the petitioner himself has flouted the terms and conditions of compromise arrived between the parties. Therefore, the respondent Bank has rightly taken decision for auctioning the property. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS),J. lg.