ORDER (PER M.S. KARNIK, J.) :

1. Mr. Nedumpara, learned counsel for the petitioner moved the petition for urgent hearing as E-auction of the sale of the immovable property is scheduled on 21/06/2025.

2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs :-

“a. To declare that the failure on the part of the Central Government/RBI to implement the MSMED notification dated 29.05.2015, in particular, to ensure that the Board of Directors of the Banks/financial institutions in this country, including the Respondent Bank, constitutes a committee for 'stressed micro, small and medium enterprise' and further to prevent the Banks and NBFCs from classifying the account of an MSME as NPA and resorting to recovery under the SARFAESI, RDB Act, IBC, NI Act, etc. in violation of the prohibition to do so as contained in Paragraph 1 and 5(4)(iii) of the said notification, amounts to gross failure on their part to comply with the statutory duty cast upon them under Sections 35, 35A, 35AA, 36, 36AA of the Banking Regulation Act and Sections 45-IE of the Reserve Bank of India Act, and Sections 9 and 10 of the MSMED Act further to direct the RBI and the Central Government to discharge their statutory duties in terms of the aforesaid provisions;

b. to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Central Government and the RBI to enforce the notification dated 29.05.2015 in its true letter and spirit and further to direct the Central Government and the RBI to ensure that recovery action initiated against the Petitioners in violation of the mandate of the notification is recalled, the clock is put back, the injustice which the Petitioners is made to suffer is redressed and that the Petitioners is compensated in full measure;

c. declare that the MSMED Act in so far as it has not created a special forum/tribunal to enforce the inter-se rights and obligations/remedies, which it has created in addition to those rights/obligations/remedies recognized by the common law, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is not ousted, for it is impossible to oust the jurisdiction of the Civil Court without providing for an alternative forum/tribunal to adjudicate the inter se disputes between parties who are governed by the Act, and further as a corollary thereof, the DRTs created under the RDB Act 1993 and the NCLTs created under the Companies Act 2013 are invested of no jurisdiction to adjudicate a dispute arising out of/involving the MSMED Act, 2006;

d. declare that the entire recovery steps initiated by Respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act or any other law, is without jurisdiction, illegal and void in as much as the Respondent are not entitled to take recourse to any form of recovery of the amounts they claim to be due to them from the Petitioner except in the manner permitted by the 'Committee for Corrective Action Plan' contemplated in notification S.O. 1432(E) dated 29.05.2015, and quash and set aside the action taken by the Respondent Bank under Section 13(2), 13(4) and 14 of the SARFAESI Act/Section 19 of the RDB Act;

e. to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction calling for the entire records and proceedings leading to the classification of the Petitioner's account as NPA, initiation of the proceedings under Section 13(2), 13(4) and 14 of the SARFAESI Act and the security enforcement rules culminating in the sale of the secured assets and to quash and set aside the same as illegal and void ab initio;

f. to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent bank to constitute a committee for the resolution of the stress in the unit of the Petitioners Company, an MSME, as contemplated in paragraph 2 of the notification dated 29.05.2015 issued under the MSMED Act, and further to direct the Committee to resolve the stress in accordance with the said notification and such other relevant not