JUDGMENT Hon’ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi (II), J.—Heard Sri Rana Mrityunjai Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Chandra Shekhar, learned counsel for opposite party No. 4 and opposite party Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are represented by counsel for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed by Munni Lal for issuing a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 25.4.2007 and 28.4.2006 Annexure 1 and 13 respectively and also to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to opposite party Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to restore the possession of the petitioner. 3. It has been averred in the writ petition that late Sri Shanker Bux Singh (father of opposite party No. 4) had taken some loan from the State Bank of India, Branch Sandila, District- Hardoi, for purchase of a Tractor and due to non-payment of said Loan, his agricultural land of Khata No. 19 Plot Nos. 394, 371 etc. area 11 Bigha was auctioned by the Tehsil authorities of Tehsil Sandila on 7.1.1991 and petitioners bid of Rs. 70, 000/- being highest was accepted on 7.1.1991, 1/4th amount of auctioned money was immediately deposited by the petitioners and the remaining 3/4 money was deposited within 15 days’ as per the provisions of U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Rules,1952. Shanker Bux filed an objection under Rule 95(1) of U.P.Z.A. and L. R. Rules, 1952 on 29.1.1991 before the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow which was decided by the Commissioner, Lucknow holding that objection was baseless and had no legal force decided on 23.3.1993. The objection was decided on 23.3.1993. After the bid was accepted petitioners deposited the necessary fee for the purchase of the stamps for registration and the Sale Certificates were issued by opposite party No. 3 Up Ziladhikari, Tehsil Sandila, District-Hardoi. Mutation in the name of the petitioners had also been effected in the revenue records and they were given the physical possession. After his objection against the sale auction was rejected by the Commissioner, Lucknow. He filed a revision before Board of Revenue, Lucknow under Section 219 of the U.P Land Revenue Act, 1901. During the pendency of the revision Shanker Bux Singh is dead in the month of August of 1998, and Rakesh Singh, opposite party No. 4 of that revision also died on 20.6.1999 but no substitution application was filed by legal heirs of the opposite party No. 4. During the pendency of the revision Shanker Bux Singh is dead in the month of August of 1998, and Rakesh Singh, opposite party No. 4 of that revision also died on 20.6.1999 but no substitution application was filed by legal heirs of the opposite party No. 4. Hence the Revision application ought to have been abated under law. An application was moved by petitioner before Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow on 3.11.1999 with a prayer to dismiss the revision being abated. Legal heirs of Shanker Bux Singh filed substitution application on 3.11.1999 opposite parties have filed any objection against the abatement application. Board of Revenue fixed on 23.5.2006 for disposal of both the applications. Later on an application dated 29.3.2006 for early hearing of the case was moved and without any notice to the petitioners 28.4.2006 was fixed for hearing. Petitioners or their counsel were not given any notice of the application and on 28.4.2006 revision was allowed. 4. It was argued from the side of petitioners counsel that without deciding substitution application and abatement applications dated 3.11.1999 Board of Revenue has erred and in most arbitrary and illegal manner illegally allowed the revision. 5. It was also argued that an application was later on moved on 24.5.2006 to recall order dated 28.4.2006 but that application was rejected by order dated 25.4.2007. 6. It was argued from the side of opposite party No. 5 that Shanker Baks Singh has deposited the entire dues within stipulated time and sell was not confirmed due to objection filed by Shanker Baks Singh Hence the impugned orders have been passed correctly. 7. There is no dispute that earlier the case was fixed for disposal on 23.5.2006 and in the meantime an application for expediting the hearing was moved in this application which is Annexure 12 of the writ petition, it was mentioned that it is apprehended that opposite party/purchaser of the land are going to sell the land so it is in the interest of justice that revision may be hear as early as possible and it may be decided on merit. There is nothing on record to show that copy of this application was above provided to petitioners’ counsel or any notice was given to petitioners’ counsel. It is also on disputed that the applications moved for substitution of Shanker Bux Singh and Rakesh Singh were undecided. There is nothing on record to show that copy of this application was above provided to petitioners’ counsel or any notice was given to petitioners’ counsel. It is also on disputed that the applications moved for substitution of Shanker Bux Singh and Rakesh Singh were undecided. It is also on disputed that there was an application moved by petitioner for abatement of this revision those three applications have not been decided by the authority below when substitution and disposal of the abatement application. It is amply clear that revision was disposed of any hurriedly manner without giving notice to the petitioners. 8. A perusal of the impugned order dated 25.4.2007 also reveals that it has been mentioned that revisionist has deposited the entire dues amount in State Bank of India Sandila District-Hardoi. But it is not been mentioned or cleverly concealed as to when the amount was deposited. 9. Rule 285H U.P. Z. A and L. R. Rules are necessary to quoted; “[285-H.(1) Any person whose holding or other immovable property has been sold under the Act may, at any time within thirty days from the date of sale, apply to have the sale set aside on his depositing in the Collector’s office- (a) for payment to the purchaser, a sum equal to 5 per cent of the purchase money; and (b) for payment on account of the arrear, the amount specified in the proclamation in Z.A. From 74 as that for the recovery of which the sale was ordered, less any amount which may, since the date of such proclamation of sale, have been paid on that account; and (c) the costs of the sale. On the making of such deposit, the Collector shall pass an order setting aside the sale: Provided that if a person applied under Rule 258-I to set aside such sale he shall not be entitled to make an application under this rule. [285-I.(i) At any time within thirty days from the date of sale, application may be made to the Commissioner to set aside the sale on the ground of some material irregularity or mistake in publishing or conducting it; but no sale shall be set aside on such ground unless the applicant proves to the satisfaction of the Commissioner that he has sustained substantial injury by reason of such irregularity or mistake. (ii) [***] (iii) The order of the Commissioner passed under this rule shall be final.” 10. A perusal of these rules clearly reveals that the person whose holding or other immovable property has been sold can apply for setting aside the sale-deed after depositing the entire dues for which recovery has been issued alongwith cost of the sale and after such deposit Collector shall pass an order setting aside the same. The authority below has ignored this provision and has gone beyond this rule mentioned and set aside the sale. Certainly in contravention of Rule 285H authority below was not authorized to do so. It appears that when the date was preponed, correct legal position was not put forth by revisionist counsel before the authority below which led to this erroneous order. In view of above the order dated 28.4.2006 and 25.4.2007 are quashed, the matter is remanded back to the Board of Revenue, Lucknow to decide afresh after disposing applications of substitution and abatement and also taking into account the provisions of Rule 285H of U.P.Z.A. and L. R. Act. 11. With the above, direction writ petition is allowed. Order dated 28.4.2006 and 25.4.2007 are quashed and the matter is remanded back to Board of Revenue, Lucknow, for decision afresh. ——————