Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74335-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12510 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Sumit Service Station And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjai Singh Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Ms. Tanisha Jahangir Monir, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State- respondents and Sri Sanjai Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-bank. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioners have prayed for the following substantial reliefs: "a) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the notice dated 07.12.2024 issued under Section 13(8) SARFAESI Act by the Respondent Bank (Annexrure No.9); b) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Bank to withdraw proceedings pursuant to notice dated 07.12.2024 under Section 13(8) SARFAESI Act, and to restrain the Bank from proceeding against the Petitioner's property (petrol pump) in auction, in compliance of the order dated 07.06.2022 passed by Hon'ble Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.242 of 2022; c) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Bank to take appropriate steps for cancellation of sale deeds dated 07.04.2022, and all subsequent sale transactions on its own cost in compliance of the conditional interim order 31.08.2021 in S.A. No.881 of 2019 and restore the ownership and possession of the properties concerned to the Petitioner; OR d) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Bank to refund the amount of Rs.56 Lacs paid by the Petitioner towards redemption of mortgage along with interest." 3. In the present case, it appears that the petitioners had filed an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), and obtained a stay order on 07.06.2022. 4. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the stay is continuing till date. She further submits that in spite of the stay order, the bank has initiated recovery proceedings by fixing a date for auction. 5. This matter was also intimated to the DRAT by way of filing an application. The DRAT had fixed the matter on 25.03.2025 and on that date as the auction had failed, another date has been fixed by the DRAT. 6. We are of the view that since the bank has initiated the recovery proceedings against the petitioners, the appeal filed by the petitioners should be heard expeditiously by the DRAT. In the event the appeal cannot be finally heard, the DRAT should at least examine the steps being taken by the bank with regard to recovery proceedings and pass necessary orders with regard to the same on the next date of hearing. 7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Shahroz (Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad