Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Sri Ashok Shankar Bhatnagar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged illegal auction proceedings, possession and issuance of wrong sale certificate. 3. The facts of the case are that the bank took physical possession of the property on February 7, 2025 from the borrower, and thereafter, handed over the property to the auction purchaser on February 11, 2025. However, from the advertisement of auction and the subsequent sale certificate provided to the auction purchaser, it is clear that the description of the property sold in auction was not correct. It appears from the facts that the borrower had purchased another piece of land and constructed a building on the property mortgaged as well as the property purchased subsequently by the borrowers. 4. In light of the same, the property that was mortgaged to the bank measured approximately 118.02 square yards, but the total property was 150 square yards. The Collector, Saharanpur pursuant to order dated February 20, 2025 has submitted its report dated March 2, 2025 which is delineated below:- 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank submits that they have handed over the property to the auction purchaser and subsequently, the borrowers have re-entered and taken possession of the property for which a first information report was lodged before the Senior Superintendent of Police and a complaint was also made before the District Magistrate by the auction purchaser. 6. Examining the contentions of learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties, the undisputed facts that materialize are as follows:- a. The advertisement for the auction mentions an area of 118.02 square yards, but the measurement provided therein was for an area of 150 square yards. b. The sale certificate issued on February 5, 2024 again mentions the area of 118.02 square yards, but the dimension provided therein indicates the area of 150 square yards. b. The sale certificate issued on February 5, 2024 again mentions the area of 118.02 square yards, but the dimension provided therein indicates the area of 150 square yards. c. The bank has handed over physical possession to the petitioner, but the same was for the entire property as no division/demarcation was made with regard to the second sale deed of the purchaser for the balance area of around 32 square yards. 7. The factual matrix above indicates that the building built on the property in question had been purchased by way of two sale deeds, one of which was mortgaged with the bank. The bank was not aware of the second sale deed, and therefore, they did not object to the construction of the building made by the borrowers. 8. It is also undisputed fact that no division of the plots were done before auction was carried out. Ergo, auction was itself vitiated because the bank could not have auctioned the property that was not divided as well as demarcated and the dimension of which indicated an area that was more than that was mortgaged with the bank. In furtherance of the auction proceedings, which were vitiated, any other proceedings taken by the bank would also stand vitiated. 9. Hence, we set aside the auction proceedings, and all the actions taken subsequently including the issue of the sale certificate and handing over possession of the property to the petitioner. We direct the bank to refund the money deposited by the petitioner for auctioned property, that is, Rs.29,51,000/- along with interest at the rate of 4% from the date of receipt of the money till the date the bank makes payment of the amount to the petitioner. The refund of the above should be made within six weeks from date. 10. We make it clear that the bank shall be at liberty to carry out a fresh auction in accordance with law. 11. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.