Order : Parth Prateem Sahu, J. 1. Petitioner has filed this petition praying for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Tahsildar Raipur, District Raipur to assist in handing over lawful possession of the mortgaged immovable property to the petitioner, in compliance with the order passed by Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Raipur in MJC Criminal No.1954/2024 under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 within a period of two weeks, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Tahsildar Raipur, District Raipur, in light of the judgments passed in AU Small Finance Bank Limited (Supra) and PNB Housing Finance Ltd. (supra), directing that after obtaining an order under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, the secured creditor shall not be compelled to run from pillar to post for execution of such order, and further directing the Tahsildar to ensure timely and effective execution of the said order, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner with cost" 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner being a secured creditor submitted an application before the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act of 2002’), which came to be allowed vide order dated 8.7.2025 directing the respondent No.2 Tahsildar to handover vacant physical possession of the secured assets to the petitioner and for that purpose he may take help of the police. Thereafter, petitioner requested so many times to respondent No.2 for compliance of the order dated 8.7.2025, but except issuing memo dated 2.9.2025 to the Maal Jamadar, respondent No.2 is not taking any steps to execute the order dated 8.7.2025 Hence, a direction be issued to the respondent No.2 to take steps for compliance/execution of the order dated 8.7.2025 within specified time. 3. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to comply with the order dated 8.7.2025 passed under the provisions of Section 14 of the Act of 2002, he is having no objection. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with writ petition. 5. Section 14 of the Act of 2002 reads thus:- “14.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured asset.- (1) xx xx xx 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 asset 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 period not exceeding in the aggregate sixty days.” 6. A bare glance of Section 14 would show that when an application is submitted by secured creditor invoking provision of Section 14, the District Magistrate shall take possession of the secured asset and deliver the possession thereof to the secured creditor within a period of 30 days, extendable but not more than 60 days in aggregate. Although the District Magistrate can authorize an officer subordinate to him and this authorization is also for the purpose of taking possession of secured assets and documents relating thereto. 7. Perusal of documents annexed along with writ petition would show that the order on application under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 is passed on 8.7.2025 and thereafter more than four months’ time has elapsed but till date possession of secured assets is not delivered to the petitioner. Whereas, Section 14 of the Act of 2002 mandates the District Magistrate to deliver possession of a secured asset within 30 days, extendable to an aggregate of 60 days upon reasons recorded in writing, to banks. 8. Whereas, Section 14 of the Act of 2002 mandates the District Magistrate to deliver possession of a secured asset within 30 days, extendable to an aggregate of 60 days upon reasons recorded in writing, to banks. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of relief sought by petitioner, the fact that application under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 was decided on 8.7.2025 and keeping in mind the time limit to take action by the District Magistrate fixed under Section 14 of the Act of 2002, this Court is of the view that present writ petition can be disposed of at this stage without issuing formal notice to private respondents because the rights of parties are not being decided by this order. 9. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.1 & 2 to make an earnest effort to execute of the order dated 8.7.2025 passed under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 and shall deliver possession of the secured assets, subject matter of writ petition, to the petitioner bank, within 30 days from the date next fixed. 10.Certified copy as per rules.