1 2025:CGHC:61114 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6566 of 2025 1 - Uco Bank, Through Authorised Officer, Soumya Ranjan Sahu, S/o- Shri Hari Bandhu Sahu, Aged About 40 Years, Office At- Uco Bank, Civics Center, Bhilai, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - District Magistrate- Cum- Collector Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Vijay Chouhan S/o Bal Chouhan, R/o- Plot No. 12, Block No. 16, Radhika Vihar, Supela, Bhilai, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - Aadhar Chouhan S/o Vijay Chouhan, R/o- Plot No. 12, Block No. 16, Radhika Vihar, Supela, Bhilai, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Archana Chouhan W/o Vijay Chouhan, R/o- Plot No. 12, Block No. 16, Radhika Vihar, Supela, Bhilai, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) ______________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Saket Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, P.L. S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.12.18 13:48:46 +0530 2 16/12/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition raising grievance that the application submitted under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002') has not been decided even after lapse of about more than two years. 2. According to learned Counsel for Petitioner, the proviso to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act provides that the decision on the like nature of the said application to be concluded within a period of 30 days and, if not so, within further period not exceeding 60 days in aggregate. However, despite the fact that from December, 2023 though about two years period has elapsed, the proceeding under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has not been concluded by Respondent No.1. 3. For ready reference, the proviso clause of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, is reproduced as under:- “1[Provided that any application by the secured creditor shall be accompanied by an affidavit duly affirmed by the authorized officer of the secured creditor, declaring that i. the aggregate amount of financial assistance granted and the total claim of the Bank as on the date of filing the application; ii. The borrower has created security interest over various properties and that the Bank or Financial Institution is holding a valid and subsisting security interest over such properties and the claim of the Bank or Financial Institution is within the limitation period; iii. the borrower has created security interest over various properties giving the 3 details of properties referred to in sub- clause (ii) above; iv. The borrower has committed default in repayment of the financial assistance granted aggregating the specified amount; v. consequent upon such default in repayment of the financial assistance the account of the borrower has been classified as a nonperforming asset; vi. affirming that the period of sixty days notice as required by the provisions of sub- section (2) of section 13, demanding payment of the defaulted financial assistance has been served on the borrower; vii. the objection or representation in reply to the notice received from the borrower has been considered by the secured creditor and reasons Page No.4 for non- acceptance of such objection or representation had been communicated to the borrower; viii. the borrower has not made any repayment of the financial assistance in spite of the above notice and the Authorised Officer is, therefore, entitled to take possession of the secured assets under the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 13 read with section 14 of the principal Act; ix. that the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder had been complied with: Provided further that on receipt of the affidavit from the Authorised Officer, the District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, shall after satisfying the contents of the affidavit pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of application.] [Provided [also] that if no order is passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate within the said period of thirty days for reasons beyond his control, he may, after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days.] 4 Provided also that the requirement of filing affidavit stated in the first proviso shall not apply to proceeding pending before any District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, on the date of commencement of this Act.] [(1A) The District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate may authorise any officer subordinate to him,- (i) to take possession of such assets and documents relating thereto; and (ii) to forward such assets and documents to the secured creditor.] (2) For the purpose of securing compliance with the provisions of sub-section (1), the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of the District Magistrate may take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force, as may, in his opinion, be necessary. (3) No act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate [any officer authorised by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate] done in pursuance of this section shall be called in question in any court or before any authority.” 4. The SARFAESI Act provides that when Section 14 proceeding is moved, the Officer shall, after satisfying the contents of the affidavit, pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of application and, if he fails to do it, then the said authority may further extend the period but not exceeding sixty days in aggregate. The SARFAESI Act further provides that the reasons shall also be recorded in the order. 5. Counsel for State would submit that as per his instructions for last many dates, Bank/applicant before Collector remained unrepresented. 5 6. Prima facie, the documents enclosed would show that the sixty days' period has already completed much before. Therefore, the Respondent No.2 is directed to conclude the proceeding under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act within a further period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the order subject to cooperation by the Bank. 7. With aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram