Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30181-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4630 of 2025 Petitioner :- Abdul Nayeem And 3 Others Respondent :- U.P. Financial Corporation (U.P.F.C.) Thru. Chairman And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- Prashant Kumar,C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner claims to be a bonafide purchaser of a property bearing Gata no.326 min. in village Gotauna, Tehsil Haidergarh, District Barabanki, which infact was mortgaged with the U.P. Finance Corporation in lieu of a loan granted by it to Major General Inayat Habibullah for establishing M/S Garhi Crystal Sugar Factory in 1973. The loan was of Rs.6.60 lakhs. The same could not be paid by the borrower. Accordingly, the same was auctioned by the U.P. Finance Corporation in favour of Ramdev Singh. In the interregnum the petitioner claims to have purchased the property from the legal heirs of Major General Inayat Habibullah vide sale deed dated 17.07.2018. It is stated that the fact that the property was mortgaged to U.P. Finance Corporation was not mentioned in the Khatauni. In these circumstances this petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Sale Certificate No. 7452 dated 12.07.2024 issued by opposite party No. 3/ Regional Manager, Region-Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation (U.P.F.C.), Lucknow in favor of opposite party no. 8 with respect to Gata No. 326 Min., area 0.822 hectare (Khata No. 0213), Village Gotauna, Tehsil Haidergarh, District Barabanki, contained as Annexure No. 5 to this writ petition. 2- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties particularly the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Tehsildar, Tehsil-Haidergarh, Barabanki to withdraw the proceeding of mutation (Case No. T202504120503466 (Ramdev Singh Versus Regional Manager, UPFC, Lucknow) based on the illegal and void sale certificate issued by U.P. Finance Corporation, despite the fact that the petitioners' names are duly recorded in the revenue records. 3- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party no. 2 and 3 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners dated 28 Contained as Annexure No.10 to this writ petition." 3. The borrower or his legal heirs have not been arrayed in this writ petition as opposite parties. We fail to understand as to how a writ petition is maintainable in such a matter. It is purely a civil dispute pertaining to property, wherein validity of the auction or for that matter validity of the purchase made by the petitioner itself is an issue. We cannot proceed any further. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail any other remedy, as available under law. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.)(Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Arnima Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench