16.09.2026 Sl. No.: 13 Court No.7 BM WPA 25027 of 2026 KARTICK RUDRA VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Sabyasachi Hazra Mr. Debarnab Sen ... for the petitioner Mr. Falguni Bandopadhyay Ms. A. Chakraborty ... for the State Mr. Baidurya Ghosal Mr. Saikat Mukherjee ... for the respondent no.4 1. The petitioner assails a possession notice issued under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Security Interest Act, 2002 read with Rule 8(1) of the Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002 issued by the respondent West Bengal Gramin Bank. 2. The petitioner is a guarantor in respect of certain credit facility availed of by the respondent no.5 from the respondent Bank. 3. The said credit facilities are allegedly in default. The respondent Bank has therefore, initiated action under the 2002 Act and in such process issued a possession notice under Section 13(4) of the Act read with Rule 8(1) of the 2002 Rules against the petitioner. 4. Any action taken by secured creditor under Section 13(4) of 2002 Act is challengeable before the 2 relevant Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the 2002 Act. 5. The petitioner therefore, has an efficacious alternative remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. 6. Although existence of an alternative remedy is not a bar for this Court to exercise writ jurisdiction, however, since the present case does not involve any public law element and it does not fall within any of the well settled exceptions justifying exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India therefore, this writ petition is not entertained. 7. WPA 25027 of 2026 stands disposed of without any order as prayed for. No costs. 8. This order was not preclude the petitioner from approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal in accordance with law or from paying the dues of the Bank or from entering into a settlement with the Bank. ( Om Narayan Rai, J. )