1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10972/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10972/2008. Subhan Khan. VERSUS The State of Rajasthan and Others. 18.03.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr.S.S.Ali, for the petitioner. Mr.R.K.Mathur ] Mr.R.K.Agarwal ] for the respondents. ***** Matter has come up on the application under Article 226(3) of Constitution for vacation of ex-parte order passed by this court on 13.10.2008 but looking to the nature of controversy, this court has finally heard the counsel for the parties at this stage. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing auction proceedings held by U.I.T., Alwar (Annexure-8). Counsel for petitioner submits that land which the U.I.T., Alwar auctioned was in the possession of petitioner, allotted to them as graveyard (Kabristan) by the Municipal Council, Alwar vide order dated 12.10.1983 and once the petitioner was holding possession of property in dispute, U.I.T., Alwar was not competent and holder of land which could be put to auction. It is submitted that auction proceedings initiated by U.I.T., Alwar is contrary to law and 2 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10972/2008 deserves to be set aside. The U.I.T., Alwar and auction purchaser filed separate reply. U.I.T., Alwar in its reply has specifically denied in para 2 that land which was put to auction is a part of graveyard (Kabristan) allotted to petitioner and in fact as per revenue record, the land in question has been registered in the name of PWD under Khata No.737 and in reference to this there was no right, title and interest of Karbala/Kabristan or of any institution and respondent-U.I.T. is competent to put this land to auction under its competence and after initiating the auction proceedings in accordance with law, bid of respondent No.4 has been finalized and sale was confirmed and possession was handed over but because of the interim order passed by this court, respondent No.4 could not have been permitted to develop the land made available to him. Auction purchaser, respondent No.4, has also placed material on record to show that his bid was finalized and he has deposited a sum of Rs.3,61,54,560/- and lease-deed was also executed in his favour. The petitioner has come before this court on strength of document (Annexure-4) dated 12.10.1983 to show that land in dispute, which is put to auction by U.I.T., Alwar, was allotted to him by Municipal Council, Alwar for graveyard (Kabristan) but there is no material on record by which it can prima facie be inferred that land which the U.I.T., Alwar put to 3 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10972/2008 auction is the same which was allotted to petitioner in pursuance of Annexure-4 by the Municipal Council, Alwar dated 12.10.1983 and so far as the allotment, as alleged by petitioner is concerned, it is seriously disputed by U.I.T., Alwar and such disputed question of fact cannot be examined by this court under its limited jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution. Consequently, this court finds no substance in the petition and the same stands dismissed. However, petitioner may avail remedy available to him under the law. (AJAY RASTOGI),J Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.