Deepanjali Vaishnav Shiksha Samiti And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed assailing the order dated 21.12.2023 passed by respondent No. 1 under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002[referred to as "SARFAESI Act" hereinafter] whereby the respondent No.1 has ordered taking and handing over of the physical possession of the property by the respondent No. 2 to respondent No.3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner No.1 is a society registered under the Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. Petitioner No. 1 is running an English Medium School in the name and style of ''Little Angel Academy'' on the said property and at present 575 students are pursuing their students in the school. The final session examinations of the students are going on in the school. Therefore, some breathing time to deposit the amount as settled under OTS may be granted to the petitioner. Recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner No.1 since it has been classified as NPA under the SARFAESI Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

On perusal of the writ petition along with Annexures, it is seen that no relief has been claimed against respondents No. 1 & 2. The only relief claimed in petition is against respondent No.3 who is a private limited company and is not "State" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, therefore not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court. On this ground also, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Phoenix ARC Private Limited Vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidhya Mandir and Others reported in (2022) 5 SCC 345 has held that if proceedings are initiated under the SARFAESI Act and/or proposed action is to be taken and the borrower is aggrieved by any of the actions of the private bank/bank/ARC, the borrower has to avail the remedy under the SARFAESI Act and no writ petition would lie and/or is maintainable and/or entertainable. Earlier also, this issue was dealt with by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court (at Gwalior) in W.P. No. 8074/2016. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable vide order dated 21.11.2016 holding that writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable against a private bank.

Taking into consideration, the settled legal position, this petition against a private company is not maintainable, therefore, does not call for interference by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. However, petitioners are free to approach the competent authority seeking redressal of his grievance in accordance with law.