1 2025:CGHC:38599 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4147 of 2025 Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through Authorized Officer, Govind Vishwakarma, S/o Shri Shiv Charan Vishwakarma, Aged About 36 Years, Office At- Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Regional Office- Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Atal Nagar, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Tehsildar, Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Smt. Sneh Singh D/o Prahlad Singh R/o Ramniwas Colony Rajmohini Ward, Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Manoj Bharati S/o Markanaday Bharati R/o Ward No. 43, Darripara, Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Manvendra Singh Gaur S/o Roshan Singh Gaur Ramniwas Colony, Rajmohini Ward, Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Saket Pandey, Advocate 2 For State : Mr. Satish Gupta, GA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 05.08.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking following relief(s) :- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for records pertaining to the case no. 94/B- 121/2023-2024, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to set aside and quash the order dated 15/07/2025, passed in revenue case no. 94/B-121/2023-2024, in the interest of justice. 10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to direct the respondent authority to rehear the revenue case no. 94/B-121/2023-2024, in the interest of justice. 10.4. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deemed just and fit in facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner Bank being aggrieved by the order dated 15/07/2025 passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector upon application under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Once the order was passed by the District Magistrate Cum Collector on 16/01/2025 in Revenue Case No. 94/B-121/2023-2024, but the same case was reopened and impugned order was passed dismissing the earlier order of 16/01/2025 and disposing of the revenue directions to recover the loan amount as per distribution of percentage from borrowers 3 without affixing any time limit. The impugned order dated 15/07/2025 is bad in law as per the orders passed by the Apex Court in case of R.D. Jain and other similar case laws. Also the Hon'ble Court in writ petitions has passed order describing the functions of District Magistrate Cum Collector under the Act of 2002. The borrower has preferred application / case before the Debt Recovery Tribunal but there is no protection from the D.R.T. towards the borrower. The possession of the secured property could be provided to the secured creditor petitioner / bank as per Act of 2002. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the submission of the respondents and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is remitted back to respondent No.2-Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Surguja, District Surguja (C.G.) with direction that the application under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 filed by the petitioner shall consider and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of ‘60 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is pertinent to mention here that respondent No.2 shall provide proper opportunity of hearing to the 4 private respondents, i.e., respondents No.4 to 6 and thereafter passed the appropriate order, in accordance with rules, regulations and law. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Vasant