WPA/26277/2026 of THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 28 September 2026

1. Affidavit of service as filed by the petitioners is taken on record.

2. However, despite service, private respondents are unrepresented.

3. Fundamentally, the present writ petition has been filed alleging inaction on the part of the District Magistrate, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, in considering the petitioners’ application presented before him under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the “SARFAESI Act”).

4. Ms. Ghosh, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that the private respondents availed of a credit facility of Rs. 46,47,234/- from the petitioner-bank. However, they defaulted in repayment of the same.

Consequently, the loan account was declared as NPA on 14.12.2022. Subsequently, the bank was constrained to take action under the SARFAESI Act and issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the Act, which was received by the borrowers on 15.2.2023. Thereafter, a notice under Section 13(4) of the Act was issued, which was duly received by them on 1.6.2023. After taking symbolic possession of the secured asset, the bank proceeded to take action under Section 14 of the Act and, accordingly, an application was filed under Section 14 of the Act before the District Magistrate, Barasat, North 24 Parganas. However, despite receipt of such application from the petitioners, no effective steps have been taken in this regard. She submits that such inaction prompted the petitioners to prefer the present writ petition.

5. Mr. Das, learned Advocate appearing for the State, submits that the petitioners’ prayer is innocuous. However, he submits that if such prayer is accepted and a direction is given to the District Magistrate, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, to consider the contentions raised in the petitioners’ application, he would have no objection.

6. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials on record.

7. As claimed by the petitioners, the borrower committed default in repayment of the loan and, as such, the secured creditor initiated action under the SARFAESI Act. After issuance of notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4)

of the Act, the secured creditor invoked Section 14 of the Act. However, the application presented by the petitioners under Section 14 of the Act has been pending for consideration before the District Magistrate, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, since 19.12.2025. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent no. 2 to consider and dispose of the petitioners’ application under Section 14 of the Act in accordance with law.

8. It is clarified that I have not gone into the merits of the petitioners’ claim as raised in the application and in the writ petition, and all points are kept open to be decided by respondent no. 2 while considering the petitioners’ application.

9. Since no affidavit is called for, allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)