Form No.J(2)

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

Present :

The Hon’ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

WPA 1585 of 2025

State Bank of India & anr.

-versus

The Learned District Magistrate, Darjeeling & Ors

For the petitioners : Mr. Milindo Paul

Mr. Nabankur Paul

Ms. Sutapa Sen Paul

Ms. Bedshruti Bose

Mr. Subham Das

For the State : Mr. Joyjit Choudhury, Ld. AAG

Mr. Sumit Kumar Ms. Rima Sarkar

For the

respondent Nos. 2-5 : Mr. Rahul Mishra

Mr. Sourav Sarkar

Heard on : 19.08.2025. Judgment on : 19.08.2025

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J. (Oral):

1. The supplementary affidavit filed in Court today enclosing the

order dated 6^th December, 2024 is taken on record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the above order dated 6th December, 2024 passed by the District Magistrate,

Darjeeling.

3. Mr. Paul, learned advocate appearing in support of the writ petition by drawing attention of this Court to the provisions of Section

14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002 would submit that notwithstanding there being no scope for the District Magistrate to direct payment of debt or to act de hors the provisions of Section 14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002, the District Magistrate by the aforesaid order has directed the borrowers to deposit the amount of Rs.3,46,85,467.55p that has fallen due. According to Mr. Paul, there is no scope for the District Magistrate to issue such direction.

4. Mr. Choudhury, learned Additional Advocate General appears on behalf of the State respondent.

5. Mr. Sarkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 7 would submit that the respondent nos. 2 to 7 were all along interested to reach to an amicable settlement. According to him, since the secured asset does not have an independent ingress and egress, the secured creditors so long could not take possession. He submits that if any direction is passed to resolve the issue by way of settlement, the respondent nos. 2 to 7 are ready and willing to adhere to the same.

6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I find that an application under Section 14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002 had been filed pursuant to the leave granted by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 5th April, 2023 in WPA 531 of 2023. Records would, however, reveal that the District Magistrate while deciding the petition under Section 14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002 despite recording his satisfaction that the proceedings may be initiated under Section 14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002 has issued certain directions for deposit of the amount as noted above.

7. To test out the power to issue the above direction and to ascertain the scope of Section 14 of the “SARFAESI” Act, 2002, the said Section is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“14. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured asset.—(1) Where the possession of any secured assets is required to be taken by the secured creditor or if any of the secured asset is required to be sold or transferred by the secured creditor under the provisions of this Act, the secured creditor may, for the purpose of taking possession or control of any such secured assets, request, in writing, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate within whose jurisdiction any such secured asset or other documents relating thereto may be situated or found, to take possession thereof, and the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or, as the case may be, the District Magistrate shall, on such request being made to him—

(a) take possession of such asset and documents relating thereto; and (b) forward such asset and documents to the secured creditor:

[Provided that any application by the secured creditor shall be accompanied by an affidavit duly affirmed by the authorised officer of the secured creditor, declaring that—

(i) the aggregate amount of financial assistance granted and the total claim of the Bank as on the date of filing the application;

(