Ruposhri Hasda @ Hansda v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

Court No. 19 WPA 28838 of 2025 (265719) Ruposhri Hasda @ Hansda Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Saikat Chatterjee Md. Abdur Rakib Mr. Biswajit Sarkar Mr. Isteyak Ahmed ...for the petitioner 31.03.2026 (AD 5) (S. Banerjee) Mr. Joydip Banerjee Mr. Tapas Kumar Dey ...for the State Mr. Ankit Sureka Mr. Biplob Das ...for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 Mr. Arnab Ray Mr. Shirsho Banerjee ...for the respondent nos. 6 and 9 Pursuant to the earlier order dated March 24, 2026, the petitioner has filed an affidavit, which is taken on record. A copy of such affidavit has been supplied to the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

In the said affidavit the petitioner has stated as follows:

<11. That, though the auction was held long back on July 17, 2024 and the petitioner inspite of depositing entire auction value at the tune of Rs.60,01,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakh one thousand only) and the fact that she

became the sole purchaser, the said property is not handed over to the petitioner and the petitioner is facing serious financial loss due to such act on the part of the respondent authorities.

12. That, I am no longer interested in the said property which was enlisted for auction under Police Station: Bolpur with Sub-registrar office at Bolpur, Mouza: Uttar Narayanpur, JL No.

96, Khatina No. 1374, Plot No. 221/1858 measuring an area of about 0.2067 acres along with a two-storied building and praying for return of sale value such as Rs.60,01,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakh one thousand only) which is lying with the Registrar General pursuant to the direction of the Hon'ble Court.

13. That, after such refund of amount such Rs.60,01,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakh one thousand only), I shall not claim any right, title and interest over the property which I purchased by way of auction conducted on July 17, 2024.= After going through the said affidavit this Court finds that the petitioner for reasons stated in the said affidavit, is no longer interested in the property which was purchased by her by auction sale and has stated that if the value of Rs. 60,01,000/- (Rupees sixth lakh and one thousand only) is refunded to the petitioner, she shall not claim any right, title and interest over

the property which she purchased by way of auction conducted on July 17, 2024.

Learned advocate appearing for the Society submits that the Society, i.e., the respondent nos. 6 and 9, may be given liberty to proceed against the original borrower and guarantors, if any, in accordance with law.

Heard the learned advocate for the State and the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies. It is not in dispute that the physical possession of the property which was the subject matter of auction sale could not be delivered to the petitioner and the petitioner is interested to take back the money which he deposited for purchasing the property through auction purchase.

This Court is, therefore, of the considered view that the money which the petitioner deposited for purchasing the property by auction sale and which is now lying in deposit with the Registrar General, High Court shall be refunded to the petitioner.

In view thereof, the learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 60,01,000/- (Rupees sixth lakh and one thousand only), which was deposited by the

respondent nos. 6 and 9 on February 9, 2026, to the petitioner by way of an account payee cheque drawn in favour of the petitioner herein as expeditiously as possible but preferably within 14 working days from the receipt of a server copy of this order.

Petitioner is directed to approach the respondent authorities immediately after receipt of the said amount and the respondent authorities shall thereafter take consequential steps for cancellation of the sale certificate and the entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a server copy of this order. The petitioner shall render all co-operation to the respondent authorities in this regard.

With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of leaving the respondent Society free to work out their remedies in accordance with law. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)