JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. A. Ganguly, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. N. Goswami, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. I have also heard Mr. G. R. Dutta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.4. It is also taken note of that the Respondent No.5 is the wife of the Respondent No.4.

2. The Petitioner herein has approached this Court being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the District Magistrate to take action in terms of Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 (for short “the Act of 2002”).

3. The facts as can be discerned from the materials on the record are that the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had taken financial assistance from the Petitioner Bank. Upon failure on the part of the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to make payment, the account of the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were declared to be non-performing assets and subsequently steps were taken in terms with Section 13 of the Act of 2002. The Petitioner Bank while taking steps under Section 13(4) of the Act of 2002 issued a possession notice o