Parallel writ petitions on pending subject matter should not be entertained; auction-related relief was split between agricultural land and house property.

Parallel writ proceedings on the same subject matter should not be entertained when the issue is already pending before another court, as judicial discipline requires restraint. The article also notes distinct treatment of two auctioned properties: the agricultural land sale was directed to proceed, subject to hearing objections on the next date and payment of sale proceeds to the Union of India. For the house property, the balance amount had been deposited, the sale proceeds were to be paid to the Union of India, the attachment was vacated, and the auction sale was set aside with a restraint on alienation without leave.

---

---

Issues: Whether the auction sale of the agricultural land should be confirmed; whether the auction sale of the house property should be confirmed or set aside; whether the High Court should have entertained a writ petition concerning property already under consideration before the Court.

Analysis: The agricultural land sale was directed to be confirmed after hearing any objection on the next date, and the sale proceeds were ordered to be paid to the Union of India. In relation to the house property, the balance amount was deposited before the Court, the sale proceeds were ordered to be paid to the Union of India, the attachment was vacated, and the auction sale was set aside with a restraint against alienation without leave. The Court further recorded its displeasure that the High Court had entertained a writ petition on the same subject matter while the proceedings were pending before it, observing that judicial discipline required the High Court not to entertain such a petition.

Conclusion: The auction sale of the agricultural land was allowed to proceed, the auction sale of the house property was set aside, and the High Court's entertainment of the parallel writ petition was disapproved for want of jurisdiction in the circumstances.

Final Conclusion: The order granted substantial relief to the Union of India in relation to the sale proceeds and resolved the house property dispute, while leaving the remaining matter for further hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: When proceedings concerning the same subject matter are already pending before the Court, a parallel writ petition on that subject should not be entertained by another court in disregard of judicial discipline.

---