Auction: Auction conducted on 26.06.1998 by the Executive Officer of the Temple Trust following due procedure under the provisions of the Endowments Act 1987 – Appellant was the highest bidder – After confirming the sale in favour of the appellant by the Commissioner, the appellant deposited the balance amount – Thereafter, sale deed was held confirmed and executed in the year 1998 – On challenge before High Court, re-auction of the property was ordered after a period of more than 23 years solely on the basis of the offer made by one JK in the year 1998 and the offer made by one LKR that they are ready to offer/pay a higher price than fetched in the public auction – On appeal, held: Neither did JK nor LKR had participated in the auction proceedings and made any offer – Both of them ought not have been permitted to raise any objection subsequently on the valuation when they had not participated in the public auction and made any offer – After the public auction is held and the highest bid is received and the property is sold in a public auction in favour of a highest bidder, such a sale cannot be set aside on the basis of some offer made by third parties subsequently – Further, unless and until it was found that there was any material irregularity and/or illegality in holding the public auction and/or vitiated by any fraud or collusion, it is not open to set aside the auction or sale in favour of a highest bidder – If there was any error in the decision-making process adopted by the authority, the remedy available was to question the sale deed in an appropriate proceeding available under the law and not by filing a petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India – Moreover, respondents are not in a position to point out any material on which it can be said that what was offered by the appellant in the year 1998 was not a fair value – Hence, order of the High Court set aside – Endowments Act 1987 – Constitution of India – Art.226.