Patna High Court
Fultun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and disposed of the petition, maintaining the status quo.
Summary
The petitioner, Fultun Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash a memo dated 08‑06‑2025 that appointed a magistrate to take possession of his land in favor of I.C.I.C.I. Bank under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. He also sought any other appropriate relief. The petitioner later invoked the alternative remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and requested to withdraw the writ petition. The Court, after hearing both sides, directed that the petition be withdrawn, allowing the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy while maintaining the status quo for two weeks. The Court noted that any limitation issues would be governed by the law of limitation and that the petitioner could approach the appropriate authority thereafter. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the order appointing a magistrate to take possession of the petitioner's land under the SARFAESI Act can be quashed by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether the petitioner may withdraw the writ petition by invoking the alternative remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- SARFAESI Act
- Section 14
- Section 17
- writ petition
- certiorari
- quashing order
- possession of secured asset
- limitation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19461 of 2025
======================================================
Fultun Kumar Son of Anandi Singh, resident of Village-Madhurapur, Ward
No. 14, Anchal-Teghra, P.O.-Barauni, District-Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate cum Collector, Begusarai.
2. The Additional Collector, Begusarai.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai.
4. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Teghra, District-Begusarai.
5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Teghra, District-Begusarai.
6. The Block Development Officer, Teghra, District-Begusarai.
7. The Circle Officer, Teghra, District-Begusarai.
8. The Authorized Officer I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (23)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs :-
(i) To issue an appropriate order/s, direction/s
including a writ preferably in the nature of
CERTIORARI for quashing the order as contained in
memo No.291 dated 08.06.2025 issued to the
petitioner under the signature of Sub-Divisional
Officer, Teghra (Hereinafter referred to as
respondent No.5) whereby and whereunder
respondent No.6 and 7 has been appointed
Magistrate to take possession of secured asset in
favour of respondent i.e. I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Begusarai
land measuring 02 katha appertaining to Thana
No.335, Khata No.3774, Khesra No. 8387 situated in
Mauza Barauri, P.S.- Teghra, District- Begusarai in
view of the request made by the bank in terms of
section 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of
Patna High Court CWJC No.19461 of 2025(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/2
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act 2002 for the sake of brevity SARFAESI
Act 2002.
(ii) To any other relief/s to which the petitioner
may be found entitled in the facts and circumstances
of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner for invoking
alternative remedy as provided under Section 17 of the Sarfaesi
Act seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition.
4. In view of the submissions so made, the writ
petition is directed to be withdrawn with liberty to take
appropriate remedy.
5. The issue of limitation shall be guided by the law of
limitation which shall be raised by the petitioner for ventilating
his grievances.
6. It is made clear that within two weeks, the
petitioner shall be take appropriate remedy and during this
period, the status quo shall be maintained and for further
continuation, the petitioner is at liberty to make appropriate
prayer before the authority.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
Checking your session…