IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.21755 of 2008 Between: M/s. Automotive Manufacturers Pvt., Ltd., Rashtrapathi Road, Secunderabad. … Petitioner And Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, Chirag Ali Lane, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri M. Papa Reddy Counsel for the respondents: Sri M.S. Ramchandra Rao This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21755 of 2008 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “… Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of respondents contained in publication published in Sakshi daily dated 12.06.2008 as well as communication dated 06.09.2008 in respect of land admeasuring Ac.3.00 cents in sy.No.61 situated at Dupadu Village, Laxmipuram Panchayat, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District belonging to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, violtive or the provisions of Section 31 of APSFC Act, 1951 and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently to quash the proceedings dated 12.06.2008 calling for sealed tenders and bids for auction published in Sakshi daily newspaper dated 12.06.2008.” At the hearing, Sri M.S. Ramachandra Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Karnataka State Financial Corporation v. N.Narasimahaiah and others[1], wherein it was held that Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (for short, ‘the 1951 Act’) cannot be invoked to enforce collateral security. In view of the same, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice is quashed. However, this order does not preclude the respondents from recovering the amounts in accordance with the 1951 Act or any other Act. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.No.28385 of 2008 and WVMP.No.3887 of 2008 are disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 23.06.2009 ES [1] AIR 2008 SC 1797