1 2025:CGHC:54552 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5823 of 2025 1 - Au Small Finance Bank Ltd., Registered Office-19/a, Dhuleshwar Garden, Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan Branch Office-3rd Floor, Sky Plaza, Gaurav Path, Near Banthia Hospital, Raja Talab, Raipur Chhattisgarh Through Its Manager Dheeraj Pandey, Son Of Vivekanand Pandey, Aged About 44 Years, Branch Office - 3rd Floor, Sky Plaza, Gaurav Path, Near Banthia Hospital, Raja Talab, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Balodabazar-Bhatapara, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 3 - Gudiya Readymade Proprietor Vijay Kumar Parpyani Address / R/o Hatri Bazar, Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapara, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Swarnkar, Advocate assisted by Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 & 2-State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.11.12 16:40:18 +0530 2 10.11.2025 1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:- “a. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities particularly respondent no. 2 to decide pending Revenue Case No. 202408210100045/2023-24 at the earliest, in the interest of justice. b. Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner secured creditor has filed an application under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act') for taking and handing over the possession of secured assets before Collector, Balodabazar/Respondent no. 2 on 16.08.2024, however, said proceedings is still pending consideration even after lapse of one year and therefore, direction be issued to Collector/Respondent no. 2 to pass an appropriate order on the application under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 expeditiously, within specified period. 3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and also perused the document enclosed along with this writ petition. 4. Perusal of the order sheet would show that respondent no. 2/Collector has heard both parties on an application filed under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 on 02.06.2025 and case was thereafter fixed for further orders but since 23 June, 2025 till 13th October, 2025 order could not be passed even after lapse of more than 04 months. According to the provision of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 decision on an application under Section 14 of the Act, 2002 is to be decided and an appropriate order has to be passed within a period of 30 days and, if not so, within a extended period, but not beyond 60 days. 3 5.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 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 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.” 6. In the aforementioned facts of the case, when the statute itself provides maximum time limit to pass an order on an application filed under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 i.e. 60 days and further considering that approximately more than one year three months have already been elapsed from the date of filing of an application, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing respondent no. 2/Collector, Balodabazar to pass order on the pending application under Section 14 of the Act of 2002, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 7. With aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza Judge