G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J.—These three Writ petitions are interlinked and interconnected were heard together and disposed of by a common order.

2. For better appreciation of the case, the reliefs prayed for in each of the Writ petition are quoted herein below:—

Re. CWJC No. 17554 of 2013

“That the Writ petition is being filed for issuance of Writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 9.7.2013 passed by Hon'ble Chairperson Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad by which Learned Chairperson was pleased to quash the order dated 11.9.2012 passed by Learned Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna, in ignorance of the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act) and Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rule), without correctly stating the facts of the case, law governed the case declared by Apex Court and without considering the pleading/submissions made by counsel of the petitioner.

The petitioner further prays for issuing Writ of mandamus to the respondents concerned from proceeding further and give effect to order passed in Appeal (T) 7/2013 (In Appeal No. 162/12) dated 9.7.2013.

The petitioner further prays for declaration of law that unless the appeal is admitted after due compliance of the deposits u/s 18(1) second proviso of the Act, the Appeal cannot be heard and decided on merit.

The petitioner further prays for issuance of any other appropriate Writ /Writs order/orders and/or direction/ directions for which petitioner may be found entitled.”

Re. CWJC No. 24742 of 2013

“That the Writ petition is being filed for issuance of Writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 9.7.2013 passed by Hon'ble Chairperson Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad by which Learned Chairperson allowed the Appeal (T) No. 12 of 2013 ( In Appeal No. 173/12) preferred by auction purchaser on the sole ground that “the counsel appearing for Reliance Industries Limited has undertaken that since the property has already been sold in auction therefore he will vacate the premises within 30 days from today.” The final order was passed without adhering to Section 18(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 which prescribe that Appellate Tribunal shall as far as may be, dispose of appeal in acordance with the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and the rule made thereunder and in the present appeal without any notice of the case as require by Act/Rule and opportunity to explain the case allowed the appeal on the submission of counsel for Reliance Industries Limited.

The petitioner further prays for issuing Writ of mandamus to the respondent concerned from proceeding further and give effect to order passed in Appeal (T) No. 12/2013 (In Appeal No. 173/2012).

The petitioner further prays for declaration of law that unless scrutiny of memorandum of appeal as per Rule 6 of Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rule, 1994, a copy of memorandum of appeal and paper book shall be served on petitioner as per Rule 13 by Registered Post further one month time is given to reply the appeal from the date of service of notice under Rule 14 and date and place of hearing is notified as per Rule 16 and only after the completion of above formalities the appeal can be decided by the appeal is admitted after due compliance of the deposits u/s 18(1) second proviso of the Act, the Appeal cannot be heard and decided on merit.

The petitioner further prays for issuance of any other appropriate Writ /Writs order/orders and/or direction/ directions for which petitioner may be found entitled.”

Re. CWJC NO. 24768 of 2013

“ That the writ petition is being filed for declaration that in view of dismissal of Appeal (T) 11 of 2013 (In Appeal No. 13/2013) order dated 11th Sept., 2012 passed in SA 84 of 2011 has become final and the measures taken by the Secured Creditor Bank under SARFAESI Act, 2002 is b