T. S. DOABIA, J. ( 1 ) THE petition took part in auction proceedings. He deposited one fourth of the bid money. This bid money/stands forfeited as according to respondents he did not deposit the balance of the three fourth amount. The case of the petitioner is that his bid was never accepted and the order of forfeiture is without jurisdiction. He has thus challenged order by which one fourth amount deposited by him was forfeited. ( 2 ) THE facts in brief are as under :the respondent No. 2, The District Central Co-operative Bank, Morena had secured an award against respondent No. 3. The Maaketing Cooperative Society, Sabalgarh. This respondent No. 3 did not meet the liability created under the award. Its property was accordingly put to auction. It had two godowns. One was located at Kailaras and the other was located at Sabalgarh. This petition is concerned with the godown which was situate at Kailaras. ( 3 ) AN auction was held with regard to the godown situated at Kailaras on 31-12-1975. The bid was for Rs. 50,200/ -. The highest bidder was the petitioner Dataram. He deposited l/4th money amounting to Rs 12 550/-on 31st December, 1975. However, the concerned officer formed an opinion that the property has not been auctioned at its legitimate value as one Lakhmichand used his influence and asked other prospective bidders not to take part in auction. A view was formed that if the godowns are reauctioned, it may fetch more price. This becomes apparent from Annexure P-3. The same opinion was formed by the superior authority. This is apparent from Annexure P-4. Notice was taken of the fact that one fourth amount stands deposited. It was, however, mentioned that the auction seems to be on the lower side. It was recorded that there was a possibility to fetch higher price in case the godown is reauctioned. Therefore, sanction was sought for reauctioning the godown. This is apparent from Annexure P-4 dated 2nd January, 1976. It appears that in pursuance of the decision so taken, the godown in question was reauctioned on 7th of January, 1976. There is nothing on the record to indicate that the petitioner took part in the auction so held on 7th of January, 1976. Again there is nothing on the record to indicate as to whether the bid given by the petitioner was ever accepted. There is nothing on the record to indicate that the petitioner took part in the auction so held on 7th of January, 1976. Again there is nothing on the record to indicate as to whether the bid given by the petitioner was ever accepted. As the godown in question was reauctioned on 7th of January, 1976 and as there is nothing on the record to indicate that the present petitioner took part in the aution proceedings which were conducted on 7th of January, 1976, it would be presumed that the proceedings conducted to auction the godown on 31st December, 1975 were not given effect to. ( 4 ) THE revenue recovery officer, Cooperative Societies, Morena in the meantime passed an order of forfeiture. It was concluded that as the petitioner had failed to deposit the balance of 3/4th amount within 15 days, the l/4th of the amount deposited amounting to Rs. 12,550/- be forfeited. A copy of this order is annexure P-6. As the amount deposited by the petitioner was forfeited, he approached the Joint Director, Co-operative Societies, Bhopal. He passed an order annexure P-9. The Joint Director recorded a six page order. But ultimately dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner as barred by limitation. The second revision preferred by the petitioner before the Board of Revenue met the same fate. He has as noticed above come to this court. ( 5 ) I have gone through the facts of the case and considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. From a perusnl. of Annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3 the following position emerges : (I) Godown at Kailaras was auctioned on 31st December, 1975 ; (II) highest bid was for a sum of Rs. 50,200/- ; (III) petitioner being the highest bidder, deposited l/4th of the same i. e. , Rs. From a perusnl. of Annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3 the following position emerges : (I) Godown at Kailaras was auctioned on 31st December, 1975 ; (II) highest bid was for a sum of Rs. 50,200/- ; (III) petitioner being the highest bidder, deposited l/4th of the same i. e. , Rs. 12,550/- ; (IV) an order Annexure P-3 was passed in which it was indicated that on account of intervention of one Lakhmichand, the bid could not go up and that it would be appropriate to reauction the godown ; (V) the matter was considered by the higher authority and on 2nd of January, 1976 recomendation was made to reauction the godown ; (VI) proceeding to reauction were in fact held on 7th of January, 1976; (VII) there is nothing on the record to indicate that the petitioner ever participated in the auction proceedings held on 7th of January, 1976. ( 6 ) THE net results is that the auction held on 31st December, 1975 was never given effect to. Even if it is presumed that the petitioner was remiss in depositing the balance of the amount, he could not be burdened with forfeiture of the l/4th amount. His bid was never accepted. There is nothing on the record to show that any order accepting the bid held on 31st December, 1975 was ever made. ( 7 ) IN these circumstances, the order passed by the authorities forfeiting 1/4th of the amount cannot be sustained. The resondent No. 2 is directed to refund the amount ; accounting to Rs. 12,550/- to the petitioner with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum. The petitioner shall also be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 250/ -. Amount of security, if any, shall be refunded to the petitioner. .