Supreme Court saved farmers’ land from auction

New Delhi: The Uttar Pradesh farmer’s land auction has been halted by the Supreme Court. For the purpose of raising dairy and buffalo, Sukhram, a Dalit farmer, obtained a loan of Rs 23,049 from the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Rural Development Bank Ltd.

Even though he paid back some of the money, Sukhram died in 2000. To recoup the remaining Rs. 7,397, the government, however, started auction procedures against his estate in 2002.

The farmer’s son contested the sale, claiming that a dead person cannot be the target of legal action. The High Court maintained the Commissioner’s judgment to put aside the auction.

The highest court sent notice to the involved respondents after hearing the farmer’s hardship, declaring, “In the meantime, status quo as on today shall be maintained.” For example, the highest court put a stop to the auction and granted the farmer temporary respite.

The interim ruling was issued on October 25 by a panel consisting of Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar.
The petitioner and the dead farmer’s son were represented by attorneys Tushar Manohar Khairnar, Md. Tauheed Arshi, Mohd Humaid, and Utkarsh Singh.

The petitioner contested the orders issued by the Allahabad High Court on January 24, 2023, and May 21, 2024. The petition against the order dated January 3, 2007, issued by the Judicial Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad, which allowed the petitioner’s objection and canceled the auction on February 15, 2002, on the grounds that it was carried out against the deceased, was being heard by the Allahabad High Court. The High Court did, however, recall the commissioner’s ruling.

The petition claimed that since farmer counsel was not present in court and was unaware that the matter had been listed before the court, the HC ruling was rendered ex-parte.

“The High Court erred in rejecting the writ petition without taking into account the petitioner’s arguments and the natural justice principle, which is why this Special Leave Petition is preferred. The reinstatement of the writ petition is essential for justice to be served, as the petitioners are suffering irreversible harm and loss as a result of the dismissal,” the petitioner said.