ORDER

Shrivastava, J. -- 1. This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved with the order of the Additional Collector dated 25.1.2021 under section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’) directing the Tehsildar to ensure delivery of possession of the mortgaged property to the respondent-Bank.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3/Bank has raised the preliminary objection that against such an order the petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal under section 17 of the Act. He has placed reliance upon certain judgments in support of his submission.

3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the remedy of appeal is not available against the order passed under section 14 of the Act and that in terms of sub-section (3) of section 14 of the Act, the order under section 14 is final and it cannot be challenged in any Court except in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Section 17 of the Act provides for remedy of appeal and reads as under :-

“17. Application against measures to recover secured debts — (1) Any person (including borrower), aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor or his authorized officer under this Chapter, [may make an application along with such fee, as may be prescribed] to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty-five days from the date on which such measure had been taken:” A bare perusal of above provision indicates that remedy of appeal is available against any of the measures referred to under section 13 (4). Section 13(4) reads as under :-

“13. Enforcement of security interest.-

(1) xxx xxx xxx

(2) xxx xxx xxx

(3) xxx xxx xxx

(4) In case the borrower fails to discharge his liability in full within the period specified in sub-section (2), the secured creditor may take recourse to one or more of the following measures to recover his secured debt, namely:

(a) take possession of the secured assets of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale for realising the secured asset;

(b) take over the management of the business of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale for realising the secured asset:

Provided that the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale shall be exercised only where the substantial part of the business of the borrower is held as security for the debt :

Provided further that where the management of whole, of the business or part of the business is severable, the secured creditor shall take over the management of such business of the borrower which is relatable to the security or the debt;

(c) against any person (hereafter referred to as the manager), to manage the secured assets, the possession of which has been taken over by the secured creditor;

(d) require at any time by notice in writing, any person who has acquired any of the secured assets from the borrower and from whom any money is due or may become due to the borrower, to pay the secured creditor, so much of the money as is sufficient to pay the secured debt.”

Section 13(4) of the Act permits the secured creditor to take recourse to measures prescribed therein to recover the secured debt. One such measure is to take possession of the secured asset. Section 14 of the Act gives remedy to the secured creditor to approach the District Magistrate when possession of any secured asset is required to be taken and it further empowers the District Magistrate to take possession of such secured asset. Hence it is clear that action taken by the District Magistrate is in furtherance of the provision contained under section 13(4).

6. Under section 17 any person aggrie