M/S Highway Diesel vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1634 Jhar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 W.P.(C) No. 917 of 2021
            M/s Highway Diesel, Dhanbad, through its proprietor, Rajesh Kumar
                                                                        ..... Petitioner
                                            Versus
            1. The State of Jharkhand
            2. The District Magistrate, Dhanbad
            3. HDFC Bank Limited, Dhanbad Branch, Bank More, Dhanbad
            4. HDFC Bank Limited, near Chandi Chhak, Cuttak (Odisha)
            5. The Sr. Manager & Authorised Officer, HDFC Bank Limited, Dhanbad Branch,
            Bank More, Dhanbad
                                                                        ..... Respondents
                                             -----

CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

-----

            For the Petitioner:               Mr. Rohit Roy
            For Respondent Nos. 1-2:          Mr. Mohan Dubey, A.C to A.G
            For Respondent Nos. 3-5:          Mr. Ashish Jha
                                             -----


04/06.04.2021      The case is taken up through Video Conferencing.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated

22.01.2021 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No.2

(wrongly mentioned as the Deputy Magistrate in the cause title, hence the same

is modified to be read as the District Magistrate) in SARFAESI Case No. 31/2019

under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

SARFAESI Act, 2002'). Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction

upon the respondent No.2 not to proceed for writ of delivery of possession by

deputing police force when viable one time settlement proposal is pending

before the respondent No.5 and O.A. No. 103/2019 is also pending before the

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi for adjudication of the admissible dues of the

respondent-Bank. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon

the respondent Nos. 4 & 5 to consider one time settlement offer dated

11.01.2021 on Rs.50-52 Lakhs on the condition repeatedly stated by the

petitioner in its different representations.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view that the

petitioner has recourse of preferring an application under Section 17 of the

SARFAESI Act, 2002 against the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the respondent No.2 in SARFAESI Case No. 31/2019 [reference may be made to

paragraph 42 of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

case of United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon & Ors. reported in

(2010) 8 SCC 110], this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ

petition at this stage. The petitioner is however at liberty to take appropriate

statutory recourse provided under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 before the Debts

Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi.

So far as the rest of the prayers made by the petitioner in the present

writ petition are concerned, this Court is also not inclined to entertain the same

under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The petitioner is however at liberty to

take all the points available with it before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi

by filing an appropriate application, if so advised.

The present writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable

with the aforesaid liberty and observation.

Satish/-                                                          (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)