HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1355 of 2025 (M/S) Shreya Sawhney ….....Petitioner Versus Punjab National Bank ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Amit Singh Chadha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Priyanshu Gairola and Mr. Suresh Dobhal, Advocates for the petitioner. Ms. Nishi Chaudhary (through video conferencing) and Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocates for the respondent/Bank. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- a. Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction to Respondent bank to provide the details/information of the auction dated 11.04.2025, as detailed in para C of the preset writ petition; b. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction for setting aside/quashing the illegal actions of the Respondent Bank, inter alia, of selling the property i.e. Plot No.2, Block A-5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057, owned by Petitioner. c. Any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that his assets have been put to auction by the respondent/Bank, but the details of the auction purchaser, as to who is the auction purchaser; whether he has deposited the money, as per 2 rules, etc. are not being provided by the respondent/Bank. He would submit that he restricts his prayer to prayer a. of the writ petition alone. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent/Bank would submit that the writ petition is not maintainable qua setting aside the auction is concerned; there have been proceedings undertaken under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, which has been finalised and the property has been auctioned; the auction purchaser has already deposited the money. She would submit that if the petitioner moves an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Dehradun, the respondent/Bank would furnish the information to the petitioner. 5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition qua the prayer b. To the extent of prayer b. the writ petition stood dismissed as withdrawn. 6. Insofar as prayer a. is concerned, a statement has already been given by learned counsel for the respondent/Bank, which is taken on record. 7. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. As and when the petitioner files an application before the DRT Dehradun seeking information regarding the auction purchaser, the same shall be furnished by the respondent/Bank. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 13.05.2025 Ravi Bisht