land. It is submitted that, as per Point No. 5 of the relevant order-sheet, where two or more applications are received for allotment, the allotment is required to be made through auction, and the petitioners have expressed their willingness to participate in such auction. Learned counsel further submits that the proceedings arising out of the rival claims ought to have been considered together and decided analogously. However, despite the petitioners' willingness to participate in the auction, the respondents have neither conducted the auction nor followed the procedure prescribed under the scheme and are proceeding to allot the subject property in favour of respondent No. 5. It is further submitted that, simultaneously, proceedings for removal of the petitioners from the subject land have been initiated, including the order dated 11.11.2021 and notice/order dated 21.02.2022, notwithstanding the fact that proceedings for settlement of the land and grant of Bhumiswami rights had already been initiated under the State Government's scheme dated 11.09.2019 and the relevant Revenue Book Circular. According to learned counsel, the said proceedings have substantially progressed and the final order could not be passed on account of the interim order operating in the matter. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are in possession of the subject Nazul land and had applied for settlement/grant of Bhumiswami rights under the applicable scheme. It is contended that respondent No. 5 is not in possession of the subject land and that his objection before the revenue authorities had already been rejected. It is, therefore, submitted that the respondents ought not to proceed with eviction while the petitioners' claims for settlement/grant of
