HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR W.P.No. 221 of 2011 Date: 18-01-2011 Between Puttapaka Education Society ……….. Petitioner and State Bank of Hyderabad, ADB Suryapet Branch, and another …….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR W.P.No. 221 of 2011 ORDER: (Per GM, J) The petitioner-educational society, which is a borrower, filed this writ petition seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents-bank in issuing the notice, dated 28-10-2010 under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity ‘SARFAESI Act’), as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to set aside the same. The brief facts are that the petitioner-educational society borrowed certain amounts from the respondent-bank and in default of repayment of the same, the respondent-bank issued the said notice, dated 28-10-2010 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAECI Act, calling upon the petitioner-educational society to pay the outstanding loan amount within 60 days, failing which they will proceed under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner- educational society made a representation, dated 01-01-2011 to the second respondent requesting permission to repay the amount in installments and also requested not to proceed further under Section 13(4) of the SARFAECI Act, and it is pending. In the meanwhile, the petitioner-educational society filed this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-educational society as well as the respondents-bank. Under Section 13(2) of the SARFAECI Act, the bank is empowered to issue notice calling upon the borrower to repay the loan amount within 60 days. But this notice does not give rise to a cause of action for the petitioner-educational society to file the writ petition. Unless the measures are taken under Section 13(4) of the SARFAECI Act, there is no cause of action for the petitioner-educational society. The writ petition is pre-matured as per the Judgment of the Supreme Court in MARIDA CHEMICALS LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA [1]. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the respondents-bank is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 01-01-2011 filed by the petitioner-educational society by passing a reasoned order under Section 13(3A) of the SARFAECI Act, and communicate the same to the petitioner-educational society. No order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J __________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J Date:18-01-2011 YCR [1] 2004 (4) SCC 311