CWP-7489-2019 and connected matters IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (1) Punjab & Sind Bank District Magistrate, Amritsar and others (2) Union Bank of India State of Haryana and others (3) Punjab National Bank State of Haryana and others (4) Canara Bank State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present: 2019 and connected matters IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Punjab & Sind Bank Versus District Magistrate, Amritsar and others Union Bank of India Versus State of Haryana and others Punjab National Bank Versus Haryana and others Canara Bank Versus State of Punjab and others Date of decision : 12.08.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate, and Mr. Tejinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner Bank in CWP Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner Bank in CWP Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Sukesh Kumar Jindal, Advocate, for respondent No.10 in CWP- **** -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-7489-2019 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents CWP-19222-2023 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents CWP-24383-2023 ( O&M ) …….Petitioner ...….Respondents CWP-16284-2024 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents Date of decision : 12.08.2025 SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY te, and Mr. Tejinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner Bank in CWP-24383-2023. for the petitioner Bank in CWP-16284-2024. Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Sukesh Kumar Jindal, Advocate, -24383-2023. 2019 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents 2023 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents 2023 ( O&M ) …….Petitioner ...….Respondents 2024 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents NAROTAM DASS 2025.08.20 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-7489-2019 and connected matters SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE 1. aggrieved by non 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, ‘SARFAESI 2. discharge possession of the secured asset to the petitioner 2.1 exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in the system. 3. directs the official respondents in these petitions under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, by handing over physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner preferably within a period of can proceed to adopt all possible legitimate means to liquidate the secured assets to recover the due amount. 4. aforesaid. Needless to say in Bank of Maharashtra Vs. District Magistrate, Hisar and others (CWP-7018 authorities. 2019 and connected matters SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE ( Oral ) All these four petitions have aggrieved by non-execution of orders passed under the provisions of Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, ‘SARFAESI It is rather surprising that the discharge their statutory duty of assisting and handing over physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) are a huge exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in the system. In view of the above, this Court by way of writ of mandamus the official respondents in these petitions under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, by handing over physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner – Banks preferably within a period of thirty days. The petitioner can proceed to adopt all possible legitimate means to liquidate the secured to recover the due amount. These petitions for the time being stand Needless to say that the guidelines laid down by Co Bank of Maharashtra Vs. District Magistrate, Hisar and others 7018-2022, decided on 28.05.2024) be adhered to by the concerned authorities. -2- ( Oral ) ve been filed by different Banks execution of orders passed under the provisions of Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, ‘SARFAESI Act’). It is rather surprising that the concerned authorities have failed to statutory duty of assisting and handing over physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner – Banks. Performing Assets (NPAs) are a huge burden on the public exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in In view of the above, this Court by way of writ of mandamus the official respondents in these petitions to execute the orders passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, by handing over physical possession Banks, as expeditiously as possible, thirty days. The petitioner – Banks, thereafter, can proceed to adopt all possible legitimate means to liquidate the secured s for the time being stand disposed of in the terms that the guidelines laid down by Co-ordinate Bench Bank of Maharashtra Vs. District Magistrate, Hisar and others 2022, decided on 28.05.2024) be adhered to by the concerned different Banks execution of orders passed under the provisions of Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and failed to statutory duty of assisting and handing over physical burden on the public exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in In view of the above, this Court by way of writ of mandamus passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, by handing over physical possession , as expeditiously as possible, , thereafter, can proceed to adopt all possible legitimate means to liquidate the secured disposed of in the terms ordinate Bench Bank of Maharashtra Vs. District Magistrate, Hisar and others 2022, decided on 28.05.2024) be adhered to by the concerned NAROTAM DASS 2025.08.20 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-7489-2019 and connected matters 5. restraint/interim/final order which may have been passed by any judicial forum, in favour of the borrowers/guarantors/any aggriev party to these petitions 6. August 12, 2025 narotam Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2019 and connected matters We hasten to add that this order shall, howeve restraint/interim/final order which may have been passed by any judicial rum, in favour of the borrowers/guarantors/any aggriev party to these petitions. All the pending applications also stand disposed of. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -3- We hasten to add that this order shall, however, be subject to any restraint/interim/final order which may have been passed by any judicial rum, in favour of the borrowers/guarantors/any aggrieved person, who is All the pending applications also stand disposed of. ( SHEEL NAGU ) CHIEF JUSTICE ( SANJIV BERRY ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No r, be subject to any restraint/interim/final order which may have been passed by any judicial ed person, who is NAROTAM DASS 2025.08.20 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment