IMPORTANT POINT
Having invoked a constitutional remedy before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner cannot, under Law, file another petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India on identical set of facts for identical reliefs.

JUDGMENT :

Kurian, J.

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is filed mainly with the following prayers :-

(a) To declare that sections 2, 12 and 15(a) of the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of Debts Laws (Amendment) Act, 2012, which has since been notified on 3rd of January, 2013 and the said Act to have brought into force as well on 15th January, 2013, as unconstitutional and void since the said Act by amendment to the Securitisation and reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, has brought Multi State Co-operative Society within the ambit of SARFAESI ACT, 2002 and the RDDBFI Act, 1993 and that to further declare that the (Amended) Act, 2012 as unconstitutional and void for it is beyond the legislative domain of the parliament to enact law concerning the “co-operative societies” except as provided for under Articles 249, 250, 252 or253 of the constitution, and in doing so in contravention of Article 245 and 246 read with Schedule VII of the Constitution of India, has trenched into the exclusive legislative domain of the State legislature, nay, had inflicted fatal injury to the federal structure of the constitution, which constitute to be the very basic feature of our constitution;

(b) To declare that, between Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (as amended) and the Multi-State Co operative Societies Act, 2002, provisions of the latter Act will prevail for recovery of purported amount due to/from a Co-operative Society or a Member or Borrower thereof and vice versa, and that the former Act stands ousted;

(c) To declare that Sections 2, 12 and 15(a) of The Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of Debts Laws (amendment) Act, 2012, inserting sub-section 2(c)(iva) in the Securitisation and reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of securities Interest Act, 2002, and sub-sections 2(d)(vi) and 19(1A) in Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, passed by the Parliament, is unconstitutional inasmuch as by the said amendment a Co-operative Society, is sought to be brought within the purview of the SARFAESI Act, 2002;

(d) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or certiorarified prohibition or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, quashing and setting aside the notice dated 7.10.2013 issued by Respondent Bank under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 and the order of the Ld. District Magistrate, Thane, dated 10.04.2015 in Case No. 88/2014, Ld. Tahsildar, Thane Notice No. revenue/Room- 1/T-1/Criminal/Vashi/7268/2015/dated 30.04.2015 and the two Possession Notices dated 10.12.2015 vide Ref. No. Criminal/201/2015 and Ref. No. Criminal/202/2015 issued by Divisional Official, Belapur, (Annexure “P2” and Annexure “P3”) as without jurisdiction, in violation of the principles of natural justice, section 91 and 91A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (XXIV of 1961) and section 84 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 and hence null and void ab initio and by an order of injunction or prohibition restrain the Respondent Bank, its officers, men, agents and privies from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's properties, which the Respondent Bank claims to be a secured asset at its hands and, in particular, from dispossessing the petitioner of her residential home under the purported powers under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002;

(e) To declare that the notice dated 7.10.2013 purportedly under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, and impugned order of the Ld. District Mag