Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010257062023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6560/2023 ASSAM TEA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT NIDHI BHAWAN LALMATI NH-37 BASISTHA GUWAHATI- 781029 ASSAM. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-01 2:THE UNION BANK OF INDIA REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 239 UNION BANK BHAVAN VIDHAN BHAVAN MARG NALIMAN POINT MUMBAI PIN-400021 3:THE UNION BANK OF INDIA REP. BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH 14/1B EZRA STREET Page No.# 2/5 KOLKATA-01 4:AYLABARI TEA ESTATE AYLABARI REP. BY ITS MANAGER P.O- AYLABARI DIST- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN-788712 5:MAHABEER AGRO ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SURESH MOHAN PRASAD SINGH HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT KHAJURAR PANDARAK PATNA BIHAR PIN-803214 6:SURESH MOHAN PRASAD SINGH HAVING HIS RESIDENCE AT 4F NABIN APARTMENT DS LANE AMBICAPATTY SILCHAR ASSAM PIN-788004 7:M/S AYLABARI TEA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR MANOJ KUMAR PODDAR AND HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT 4 FAIRLIE PLACE KOLKATA-01 ------------ Advocate for : J Borah Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 28.01.2026 (Arun Dev Choudhury, J) 1. We have heard Mr. J. Borah, learned Advocate for the Page No.# 3/5 petitioner and Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. M. Sarma, learned Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner/Assam Tea Employees Provident Fund Organization, a statutory body under the Assam Tea Plantations Provident Fund (and Pension Fund) (and Deposit Linked Insurance Fund) Scheme Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1955), challenging the e-auction sale notice issued by the respondent/Union Bank of India on 13.10.2023 for sale of Aylabari Tea Estate. The Act of 1955 mandates 12% contribution from both employers and employees (wages up to Rs. 15,000/- per month) to provide social security for tea workers in Assam’s tea plantations. 3. The Tea Estate had become a chronic defaulter in arrears of provident fund dues, provident fund administrative cost, 15% statutory interest, DLI damage charge and statutory interest thereon amounting to Rs.36,06,854.90 for the period with effect from 02.10.2003 till 27.12.2018. Accordingly, demand notice dated 29.06.2019 was issued. 4. The petitioner/organization, managed by a Board of trustees, claims a statutory first charge under Section 10(2) of the Act of 1955 over the estate’s assets for those of the workers, whom they insist for being paid in priority to all other debts, including bank mortgages due to the non-obstante clause overriding other laws. Page No.# 4/5 5. The fact of the case, in short, is that the Aylabari Tea Estate (respondent No. 4), owned by respondent No. 5, defaulted on loans of the Union Bank of India (respondent Nos. 2 and 3), whereupon the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 were invoked for taking symbolic possession and auction of the estate with the reserve price fixed at Rs. 4,50,00,000.00. 6. Since the petitioner/organization was never notified of the possession or auction, which they learnt only through a newspaper notice sometime in October, 2023, they have challenged such auction sale claiming their first charge on the sale proceeds. 7. Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned senior Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 submits that the amount due towards the petitioner under the demand notice already issued in terms of the Act 1955 shall be paid within a period of 2 weeks from today. 8. Responding to such argument, Mr. J. Borah, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that if the due to the petitioner/organization is paid within two weeks from today, there shall be no surviving cause of action for the petitioner to pursue the present case. 9. In view of the afore-noted consensus arrived at the bar and assurance given by Mr. Choudhury on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the present writ petition stands closed. 10. The embargo put on disbursement of the sale proceeds/issuance of sale certificate, shall thus be lifted on the Page No.# 5/5 payment of the amount under demand and as agreed. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant