IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21313 of 2010 Date of Decision : November 30, 2010. Sh.Kunal Mohan Jain .....Petitioner versus The Recovery Officer-I, Debt Recovery Tribunal-II & others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Paras Money Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner was the highest bidder in the public auction held on 7.10.2008, who offered Rs.5,16,000/- for the residential plot situated at Malerkotla, the reserved price of which was Rs.5,10,000/-. The Recovery Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal refused to confirm the sale on the plea that the price offered by the petitioner is on lower side and that it appears that there was no healthy competition at the time of auction. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order of the Recovery Officer before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II who has also turned down the petitioner's plea vide order dated 7.9.2010 (Annexure P-2). Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length C.W.P.No .21313 of 2010 2 and perused the impugned orders. In my considered view, no interference is called for by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction for the reason that the view taken by the Recovery Officer or the Debt Recovery Tribunal is just, fair and one of the possible views. The petitioner would undoubtedly be entitled to participate in the fresh auction proceedings. However, in order to wipe out the petitioner's apprehension that the fresh bid, if any, to be given by him is also not likely to be accepted, it is directed that offer of the highest bidder would not be turned down by the Recovery Officer without giving an opportunity of hearing to such highest bidder. The petitioner shall be entitled to seek refund of the amount already deposited by him alongwith due interest, if so permissible as per the terms and conditions. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. November 30, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE