IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9618 of 2011(B) ------------------------ PETITIONER : -------------------- T.E.ASHRAF, AGED 56, S/O.EASA, THEKKAPARAMBIL, (MALABAR RESTAURENT NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION) CMC 3/643, CHERTHALA PO, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 524. BY ADVS. SRI.E.M.MURUGAN SRI.SINU.G.NATH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 685 001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, THE ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 011. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., CHERTHALA BRANCH, CHERTHALA - 688 524. 4. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ALAPPUZHA 688011. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI. P.K. VIJAYAMOHAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9618 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge raised in this writ petition is against Ext.P2 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Considering the effective remedy provided under the statute, as contemplated under Section 13(3A), it is highly premature for this court to consider the matter. 2. The limited grievance expressed by the petitioner is that the respondent Bank is not considering the benefits made available by the State Government as per Ext.P4 circular. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent Bank pointed out that, considering the representation made in this regard the Bank had taken a decision, and Ext.P13 is the reply issued intimating W.P.(C).9618/11 -2- such decision. 3. Under the above circumstances I am of the opinion that it is for the petitioner to pursue relief if any based on Ext.P4, by approaching the appropriate higher authorities in the co-operative department. It is left open to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act by invoking the statutory remedies. Reserving the liberties of the petitioner as stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb