Judgment :- 1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the impugned attachment and sale notices issued by the second respondent respectively in R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 23.04.2012, and R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 05.06.2012 and quash the same thereby direct the respondents to extend the time for repayment of loan to the petitioner's loan account in 183/NFS to further date as fixed by this Court. 2. Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. The writ petition is filed challenging the Attachment and Sale Notices issued by the second respondent dated 23.4.2012 and 5.6.2012. Petitioner claims that he has taken a loan for construction of a marriage hall and in default in payment of the loan amount, the property of the petitioner was brought to auction by paper publication dated 9.2.2012 and a sum of Rs.11,21,994/- was claimed. Thereupon the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- on 8.3.2012 and the copy of the receipt is furnished at page 7 of the typedset of papers. Thereafter, a demand notice dated 16.4.2012 has been issued in Form 4 for a sum of Rs.11,22,244/-and Form No.5 has been issued demanding Rs.11,21,994 on 23.4.2012. It is also followed by a paper publication dated 11.7.2012 whereunder the petitioner's lands are sought to be auctioned for recovery of a sum of Rs.11,21,994/-. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- paid on 8.3.2012 has not been given credit. The authorities unilaterally proceeded to recover the original amount and the representation given on 12.7.2012 has not been considered. Petitioner is willing to pay further amount as may be specified by this Court and also seeks indulgence to make a representation for settling the entire amount if sufficient time is granted. 5. On the face of the receipt dated 8.3.2012, it appears that the sum of Rs.2,50,000/-deposited on 8.3.2012 to Account No.10526 by the petitioner for which a receipt has been issued, has not been taken into consideration before proceeding with the auction for recovery. In any event, the respondents have to justify as to how the loan amount remains Rs.11,21,994/- even after payment of Rs.2,50,000/-. The representation of the petitioner in this regard has also not been considered. 6. In any event, the respondents have to justify as to how the loan amount remains Rs.11,21,994/- even after payment of Rs.2,50,000/-. The representation of the petitioner in this regard has also not been considered. 6. In view of the above, this court is constrained to direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.7.2012 immediately and rework the petitioner's accounts before proceeding to auction the petitioner's property. Petitioner is directed to deposit further amount of Rs.2,00,000/-on or before 3.8.2012. The payment made on 8.3.2012 and the further payment as directed by this court shall be taken into consideration and after proper intimation of the accounts to the petitioner, the authority will proceed for recovery by following the procedure prescribed by law. Petitioner's request for settling the balance due on a time frame may also be considered if permitted under law. Till such time, the accounts are reconciled after further payment by the petitioner as above, the authority shall not proceed with the auction. 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.