IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 5188 of 2009 Between: M/s. Routhu Veera Raghava Rao & Sons Rep by Routhu Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Late Routhu Veera Raghava Rao, Hindu, Aged about 45 years, Bondada Street, Palakol, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector & District Magistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru. 2 The Chief Manager & The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India, Palkol, West Godavari District. 3 The Branch Manager State Bank of India, Palkol, West Godavari District. 4 The Tahsildar, Palakol Mandal, Palkol, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the Letter dt. 21-8-2008 of the Authorised Officer & Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Palakol, West Godavari District, 2nd Respondent herein and the consequential Proceedings ROC No. 6683/2008/D7 dt. 08-11-2008 issued by the Collector & District Magistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru, 1st Respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, without jurisdiction, null and void and violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India and opposed to the very spirit and object of the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assests and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.V.SESHA SAI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the letter-dated 21.8.2008 of the Authorized Officer and Chief Manger, State Bank of India, Palakol, West Godavari District-second respondent herein and the consequential proceedings Roc.No. 6683/2008/D7 dated 8.11.2008 issued by the Collector and District Magistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru-first respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioner filed S.A.No. 116 of 2008 along with I.A.No. 724 of 2008, against respondents 2 and 3 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam under Section 17(1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 (for short “the Act”) questioning the notices dated 15.5.2008 and 16.7.2008 issued under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the Act respectively by the respondent-Bank. It is stated that the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam granted interim stay of operation of notices dated 15.5.2008 and 16.7.2008, on 22.9.2008 on condition of the petitioner depositing Rs. 1,00,000/- on or before 13.10.2008. It is further stated that on 12.1.2009 the Tribunal extended the stay on condition of depositing Rs. 3,00,000/- on or before 30.1.2009. It is stated that the petitioner paid total amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- on different dates. It is stated that in exercise of powers conferred under Section 14 of the Act, the Tahsildar, Palakol Mandal is authorized to take possession of the mortgaged properties and hand-over the same to the Authorized Officer and Chief Manager, State Bank of Inida, Palakol, who is authorized for taking physical possession of the schedule properties or to recover the amounts from the defaulting Borrower. Respondents filed counter admitting that the petitioner has deposited Rs. 4,00,000/- and the stay granted in his favour is in operation and the matter is still pending disposal before the Debut Recovery Tribunal. However, the first respondent-The Collector & District Magistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru inadvertently passed the impugned order dated 8.11.2008 and curiously the Chief Manager and the Authorized Officer, State Bank of India, Palakol, by virtue of the proceedings dated 21.8.2008 directed the Collector to take decision under Section 14 of the Act, which in our view is illegal inasmuch as the matter is seized of by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the stay is in operation. As the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- and there is no denial with regard to the said amount in the counter, we deem it just and proper that the proceedings dated 21.8.2008 of the second respondent and the proceedings dated 8.11.2008 of the first respondent are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the letter dated 21.8.2008 of the Authorized Officer and Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Palakol, West Godavri District-second respondent herein and the consequential proceedings in ROC No. 6683/2008/D7 dated 8.11.2008 issued by the Collector and District Magistrate, West Godavai Distraict, Eluru- 1st respondent herein are set aside. The Debts Recovery Tribunal is at liberty to proceed with the matter and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dt. 01.06.2009 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Collector & District Magistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru. 2 The Chief Manager & The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India, Palkol, West Godavari District. 3 The Branch Manager State Bank of India, Palkol, West Godavari District. 4 The Tahsildar, Palakol Mandal, Palkol, West Godavari District. 5. Two CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad OUT 6. 2 CD Copies