ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question action of the respondent/Canara Bank (‘the Bank’ for short) in notifying conduct of e-auction on 29-04-2021, further communication dated 23-03-2021 whereby the Bank withdraws One Time Settlement (‘OTS’) that was offered and has also sought for a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to accept OTS.

2. The facts adumbrated in the petition are as follows:

The petitioner is a private limited Company in the name and style of M/s Rima Transformers and Conductors Private Limited, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The Managing Director of the Company will be hereinafter referred to as the petitioner. The petitioner approaches the respondent/Bank for availing credit facility. The total loan that was availed by the petitioner was Rs. 18 crores. The installments towards loan not having been made at regular intervals as was necessary, the account of the petitioner slipped into becoming a Non-Performing Asset (‘NPA’). Negotiations were held between the petitioner and the Bank.

3. The Bank after issuance of a notice to the petitioner indicating that he has been in huge default in payment of installments, initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short). Again a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 22-03-2019 seeking to take symbolic possession of the properties of the petitioner mortgaged with the secured creditor i.e. the Bank. It is then the petitioner and the respondent began to talk about settlement and OTS comes to be offered by the petitioner and accepted by the respondent/Bank. The first offer of OTS was accepted by the Bank on 28-08-2019 indicating certain amount in the communication. This was replied to again by the petitioner accepting the terms and conditions mentioned in the letter dated 28-08-2019 which directed payment of certain amount.

4. On 28-08-2019 a sum of Rs. 18/- crores was the amount that ought to have been paid by the petitioner in terms of the settlement. There was a little delay of 3 months in executing the same. Later, with the onset of COVID-19 pandemic, the Bank itself extends OTS to the petitioner and directs that the petitioner has to pay the entire amount on or before 28-02-2021. The petitioner was also permitted to sell the property that was mortgaged with the Bank, as the petitioner had a potential buyer of the said property. The property was sold by the petitioner and Rs. 18.90 crores was deposited to the Bank towards the account. What remained, as claimed, was certain amount of interest to be paid upon the said amount. The outstanding amount, as claimed by the respondent was in total Rs. 19.22 crores. The petitioner on 28-02-2021 itself deposited Rs. 19/- crores. What comes about is not closure of entire proceedings. The Bank by its communication dated 23-03-2021, on the ground that the petitioner has not paid entire amount in full, withdraws OTS and cancels the offer extended. Not stopping at that, the other properties of the petitioner were put to sale by issuance of a paper publication indicating that e-auction would be conducted on 29-04-2021. It is at that juncture the petitioner knocks at the doors of this Court, in the subject petition.

5. The petition having been entertained, an interim order of stay of the auction and all further proceedings was granted by this Court. The interim order so granted was solely on the ground that the petitioner had not defaulted on OTS but had complied it. At the outset when the petition was filed the conduct of e-auction was not called in question. Later during the pendency of these proceedings an application for amendment is filed raising a challenge to the communication withdrawing OTS. The application for amendment was