it. s S APHC010577562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH . AT AMARAVATI ^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRUUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ■A. /A: 3D =iSsr-' ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 29692 OF 202fi Between: ^ Sfo Venkatesam Aged 38 years Occ Service R/o 16 Water Front Poulami Estate Vishali Nagar, Madinaguda, Hyderabad S^nagonda,, W/o Venkatesam Aged 58 years OccHouse Wife R/o 16 Water Front Poulami Hyderabad.Pin500050 Estate, Vishali Nagar, Madinaguda, ...Petitioners AND 1. The Authorized Officer, ICiCI bank Rep by its authorized signatory K. irir^h^v,-^ ,° ICICI bank limited Hyderabad branch and District Authorized officer of ICICI Bank, Regional Office Second Floor, Union of India, Rep by its Finance Secretary Delhi ^ 2. Visakhapatnam ministry of Finance, New 3. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the Circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particuiarly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent bank in issuing advocate commissioner notice dated 17-10-2025 without serving sale notice to me under Rule 8(6) of the Securitization Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, without obtaining valuation of the auctioned property from an approved Interest valuer as required under Rule 8(5) (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, without of the Securitization proper affixation of sale notice on subject property under 8(7) of the Securitization Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, without following due process and the inaction of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Visakhapatnam, in not considering I.A No. 4071 of 2025 in Securitization Appiication vide S.A. No. 637 of 2025, particuiariy in view of the imminent threat of creation of third-party interests through iilegal auction arbitrary, illegal, violative of as provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, violative of Securitization Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, devoid of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent bank not to commissioner notice from the Schedule Property. evict the Petitioner herein as the advocate lA NO: 1 OF 207.*^ Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court, may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings before the Hon’ble Court Magistrate at Machilipatnam in connection with the warrant issued in CrI.M.P. No. 153 of 2025 in C.F. No.233 of 2025, whereby an Advocate Commissioner has been appointed to take physical possession of the subject property and evict the petitioner. Pending the final disposal of the Hon’ble Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, and the adjudication of the present writ petition. of the Chief Judicial S.A. No.637 of 2025 before Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MEDIKONDA KONDALA Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR OF INDIA RAO GENERAL The Court made the following order: f m APHC010577562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) • I [3561] 0^5 WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.29692 of 2025 Between: 1.VARUN SHANAGONDA, S/0 VENKATESAM, AGED 38 YEARS OCC: SERVICE R/0 16, WATER FRONT POULAMI ESTATE VISHALI NAGAR, MADINAGUDA, HYDERABAD. PIN;500050 2.PADMAVATHI SHANAGONDA, W/0 VENKATESAM AGED 58 OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/0 16, WATER FRONT ESTATE, VISHALI NAGAR, MADINAGUDA, YEARS POULAMI HYDERABAD.PIN:500050 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, ICICI BANK AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY K. PAPA RAO S/0. BABU RAO AGED 50 YEARS, BANK LIMITED, 500007. REP. BY ITS OCC: AUTHORIZED OFFICER OF ICICI HYDERABAD BRANCH AND DISTRICT, 2. ICICI BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM. SECOND FLOOR 3.UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. ...RESPONDENT(S); V 2 CMR,J & TCDS,J W.P. No. 29692 of 2025 I Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.MEDIK0NDA KONDALA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 CMRJ & TCDSJ W.P.No.29692 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.29692 of 2025 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) This writ petition for Mandamus is filed to declare the action of the respondent-bank in issuing Advocate-Commissioner Notice dated 17.10.2025, without serving sale notice on the petitioners as required under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, and without obtaining the valuation of the auction property from an approved valuer as required under Rule 8(5) of the aforesaid Rules, and on other grounds, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. At the time of hearing the writ petition, it is stated by the learned 2. counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have already approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, by filing S.A.No.637 of 2025 challenging the aforesaid proceedings, and have also moved an application in I.A.No.4071 of 2025, seeking stay of the proceedings, it is stated that as the Tribunal has issued notice and posted the matter to a distant date and as possession of the property is sought to be taken on 30.10.2025 under the impugned proceedings, 4 CMH,J & TCDS.J W.P.No.29692 of 2025 the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court aforesaid relief and for stay of the seeking the order to take possession of the property. 3- As the petitioners have already approached Tribunal, challenging the impugned proceedings, and petition preferred by them is pending adjudication before the Debts Recovery Tribunal the Debts Recovery as the stay we are not inclined to interfere in this writ petition. 4. However, considering the main grievance of the petitioners that the possession of the property is sought to be taken Itself, and as the Debts Recovery Tribunal on 30.10.2025 has issued notice and posted the matter to a distant date, they would the possession of the suffer irreparable loss if property is taken tomorrow without redressal Recovery Tribunal of their grievance by the Debts we are of the considered view that this direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal for stay and dispose of the writ petition can be disposed of to consider their application same, according to law, after hearing both court hours tomorrow i.e., on 30.10.2025 with a the parties, by the end of the without fail. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Stay application i.e.. a direction to to hear the petitioners’ I.A.No.4071 of 2025 in S.A.No.637 of 2025 and 5 CMR,J & TCDS.J W.P.No.29692 of 2025 dispose of the same on merits, according to law, by 5.00 p.m. on 30.10.2025. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- K J RAJA BABli . ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Authorized signatory. Authorized Officer, ICICI Bank, K. Papa Rao S/o Babu Rao aged 50 years Occ: Authorized officer of ICICI bank limited Hyderabad branch and District, . 2. ICICI Bank, Regional Office Second Floor, Visakhapatnam 3. The Finance Secretary, Union of India, ministry of Finance, New Delhi 4. One CC to Sri. Medikonda Kondala Rao Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Additional Solicitor General of India [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies GSC *» HIGH COURT DATED:29/10/2025 ORDER WP NO. 29692 OF 2025 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS