← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/12053/2018disposed offdismissed for default

Assets Reconstruction Company India Limited Through Chief Officer Legal v. The Collector Dhule

2018-10-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. M. Borde,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Mangesh S. Patil2 pages

{1} wp12053.18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 12053 OF 2018 Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Limited Petitioner

Versus

The Collector, Dhule.

Respondent Mr. V.A. Bagdiya, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. A.B. Girase, GP for Respondent.

CORAM : R.M.BORDE & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 26th October, 2018 PER COURT:

Petitioner is praying for issuance of directions to the District Magistrate to decide the application tendered by petitioner seeking assistance for assuming possession of the secured assets under section 14 of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It is informed that the applications presented by petitioner in the year 2011 and 2014 are pending for consideration and no order has been passed yet. In view of provisions of section 14 of the Act, the District Magistrate is mandatorily required to decide the application within a period of sixty days from the date of its presentation or within further period of thirty days extended period however, the mandate of law is that in any case, the application is required to be decided within a period of ninety days. In the instant matter, it appears that the applications are pending since years together and there does not appear to be any justifiable

{2} wp12053.18.odt reason. Learned AGP informs on instructions that out of seventeen applications presented by petitioner, eleven are already decided and six applications are still pending. The applications those are not yet decided would be dealt with and appropriate orders would be passed within a period of thirty days from today. It is also further informed that if the petitioner approaches the District Magistrate with appropriate request pointing out the presentation and pendency of the application, appropriate steps would be taken in consonance with the proceedings of law. In view of above, writ petition stands disposed of. MANGESH S. PATIL R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE dyb