WP(C) 4323/2010 WP(C)BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B K SHARMA Heard Mr. A K Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. T Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent Corporation. This writ petition has been filed making a grievance against the Annexur e-12 Auction Sale Notice published by the respondent Corporation in the issue of Assam Tribune dated 16.07.2010. Amongst others, the said Notice includes the na me of the petitioner and the particulars of the mortgaged assets to be auctioned by way of public auction. The aforesaid course of action has been adopted by the respondent Corpor ation on failure of the petitioner to repay the loan amount it had obtained from the Corporation. The amount is stated to be Rs.18,40,000/- (Rupees eighteen lak hs forty thousands) only. The fact of obtaining the loan and failure of the peti tioner to repay the same as per the terms and conditions of the loan agreement a re all admitted by the petitioner. By Annexure-9 letter dated 10/15.9.2009, the petitioner was intimated th at the total outstanding dues payable to the respondent Corporation stood at Rs. 1,70,01,928/- (Rupees one crore seventy lakh one thousand nine hundred and twent y eight) Only. Accordingly, direction was issued for clearing the outstanding du es (as on 30.06.2009). In the letter, upon a reference to the provisions of Sect ion 29 and 32(G) of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, it was intimated that on failure to repay the loan amount possession and management of the busine ss of the petitioner would vest on the Corporation. In response to the Annexure-9 letter 10/15.9.2009 the petitioner by its letter dated 07.10.2009 while admitting the liability requested the respondent C orporation not to take any legal action and to give it a chance to re-establish the Unit. In the letter it was further indicated that although it was promised e arlier that an amount of Rs.20000-25,000/- towards repayment of the loan amount would be made but such payment would be @ Rs.10,000-15,000/-. By Annexure-11 letter dated 08.02.2010, the petitioner was intimated abo ut the decision of the respondent Corporation to take over the possession of the unit of the petitioner as per Section 29 of the said Financial Corporation Act, 1951. It is on record that the respondent Corporation has taken over the posses sion of business concern of the petitioner. Thereafter, for realization of the d ues payable to the respondent Corporation it has issued the impugned Public Auct ion Notice dated 16.07.2010. Mr. A K Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly admits th at although the petitioner does not have any legal ground to appeal against the action of the respondent Corporation but the respondent Corporation should give some time to repay the loan. Mrs. T Goswami, learned Standing Counsel for the re spondent Corporation on the other hand submits that when there is failure on the part of the petitioner resulting in taking over of the business concern by the respondent Corporation, there is no other option left for the respondent Corpora tion but to take the impugned action. She submits that in fact the Public Auctio n took place on 04.08.2010. According to Mr. Purkayastha, learned counsel for th e petitioner public auction was only in respect of the machineries and not the l and and building. In view of the above, while not interfering with the impugned Public Auc tion Notice it is hereby provided that it will be open for the petitioner to app roach to the respondent Corporation with appropriate application seeking appropr iate relief. In the event of making such representation the respondent Corporati on may consider the same in accordance with law.