IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16849 of 2011 Raj Kumar Bishwakarma son of Late Rajnandan Bishwakarma, resident of Village-Dharhara, P.S. Ara Town, District-Ara. ….. Petitioner. Versus 1. Authorised Officer, UCO Bank, Zonal Office, 4th Floor, Block-A, Mourya Lok Complex, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna. 2. UCO Bank, Branch Ara through it Manager, District-Ara. 3. Branch Manager, UCO Bank, Ara District-Ara. …. Respondents. ------------------ For the petitioner : Mr. Mritunjay Pd. Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. N. N. Ojha, Advocate. ---------------- 02/ 29.09.2011 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- I. For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the possession notice dated 03.09.2011 issued under the signature of Authorised Officer (Respondent no.1) under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act in short SERFAESI Act. II. For issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authority not to take any action in the light of aforesaid notice dated 03.09.2011 over land in question with respect to the land of the share of other brother of loanee. III. For issuance of other writ/order/direction which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case for the ends of justice. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents objects that this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the possession - 2 - notice under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for the sake of brevity) and there is specific provision under the Act for an appeal against such an order under Section 17 thereof. 4. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition with a liberty to file an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act against the impugned notice. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. However, if the petitioner files an appeal before the said authority within three weeks from today along with the requisites and a copy of this order as well as an interlocutory application for condoning the delay the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to filing of this petition and shall decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. If the petitioner wants any interim order, he will be at liberty to file an interlocutory application in the appeal which should be decided immediately by the appellate authority without any delay. Sunil/ (S. N. Hussain, J.)