C o u r t N . 2 2 S l 1 5 1 / C L 28.07.26 D/L Sl-07 Ct.07 (Samar) WPA 18018 of 2026 M/s Maa Nandakeshwari Hardware & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Anirban Banerjee, Ms. S. Gupta, Mr. Sayantan Banerjee, …. for the petitioner. Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly, Ms. Srijani Ghosh, Ms. Simrin Hussain, Mr. Pujal Musahib, … for the ICICI Bank. Mr. Susanta Datta, Mr. Nemani Srinivas, ….for the State respondent. 1. The petitioner has come up before this Court challenging the communication dated July 21, 2026 issued by the Block Development Officer, Sainthia Development Block Ahmadpur, District- Birbhum whereby the Block Development Officer has intimated the petitioner that the said authority would take possession of the secured asset of the Bank in terms of an order dated May 26, 2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Birbhum. 2. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the notice impugned in this writ petition could not have been issued by the Block Development Officer inasmuch as, the said notice has been issued after the period specified in the order dated May 26, 2025 passed by the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the 2002 Act. He 2 submits that the order died after the expiry of the said and has become unimplementable. 3. Learned advocates appearing for the respondent Bank as well as the State authorities submit in unison that the petitioner has already challenged the said order passed by the District Magistrate, Birbhum under Section 14 of the 2002 Act before the relevant Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) by filing an application under Section 17 of the 2002 Act. 4. A copy of the order dated July 23, 2026 passed by the DRT, Siliguri has also been handed up to Court by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner. The same is taken on record. 5. It is thus evident from the material on record that the petitioners’ SARFAESI application being NDN/410/2026(TSA) is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The prayers made in the SARFAESI application specially prayer-e (at page 46 of the writ petition) as well as the interim prayer-a (at the page 47 of the writ petition) clearly indicate that the order passed by the District Magistrate, Birbhum under Section 17 of the 2002 Act has been challenged before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. 6. Since the main order dated May 25, 2025 is already before the DRT therefore challenge to the notice which is just consequential to the main order, cannot be entertained by this Court by way of a writ petition. 3 7. This writ petition is not entertained. The petitioner is left free to take appropriate steps and all points before the relevant Debts Recovery Tribunal where the SARFAESI application is pending. This writ petition is not entrained. 8. With the above observations, WPA 18018 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities. (Om Narayan Rai, J.)