2026:JHHC:20889

-: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(C) No. 4270 of 2026

-----

Jharkhand Gramin Bank, a Banking Institution constituted and formed

under the provisions of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (sponsored by

the State Bank of India), having its Head Office at 3

rd

Floor, Zila Parishad

Market Complex, Kutchery Road, Ranchi 834001, and having one of its

Branch Office Stressed Asset Resolution Branch (SARB) at Zila Parishad

Market Complex, 4

th

Floor, Kutchery Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand 834001,

being represented through its authorised signatory being Mr. Ramcharan

Prasad Rajak S/o Late Maho Ram, the Chief Manager of the SARB,

Jharkhand Gramin Bank, PO GPO, PS Lalpur, Ranchi.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Personel,

Administrative Reforms & Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, Project

Building, PO + PS Dhurwa, Ranchi.

2. The District Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Deoghar, Office of the

District Collector, Deoghar, PO & PS Deoghar, District Deoghar 814112.

3. M/s Satguru Enterprise (Borrower) through its Proprietor, Mr. Hira Nand

Jha, Mouza Bandha Baidnathpur, PO B. Deoghar, PS Deoghar, Distt

Deoghar 814112.

4. Smt. Rita Jha (Guarantor), W/o Mr. Hira Nand Jha, House No.98, Ward

No.27, At Param PrakashaNand Jha Road, PO B. Deoghar, PS

Deoghar Town Police Station, Bilasi Town, Deoghar, Jharkhand Pin

814112.

5. Mrs. Rina Ray (Guarantor), W/o Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar Ray, At Gram 52

Bigha, Madhupur, PO Margomunda Police Station, P.S. Margomunda

Police Station, Dist. Deoghar, Jharkhand 815353.

… … Respondents

----

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4307 of 2026

----

Canara Bank, represented through its Authorised Officer, Specialised

A.R.M. Branch, being Mr. Keshava Ranjan, aged about 37 years son of

Kamlesh Kumar Choudhary, both having their Office at “Canara Bank”,

ARMB Branch, Pee Pee Compound, PO GPO & PS Lower Bazar, District

Ranchi.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Jharkhand

2. District Magistrate cum Dy. Commissioner, Dhanbad having its Office at

Collectoriate, PO & PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad.

3. Sweta Sharma, wife of Vikash Sharma, resident of 114 Lal Bazar,

Jharia, Near Shyam Mandir, Jharia, Dhanbad, PO & PS Dhanbad,

District Dhanbad.

4. Vikash Sharma son of Prem Kumar Sharma, resident of Mahto Market

Baliapur, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Baliapur, District Dhanbad.

… … Respondents

----

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 2 :-

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4385 of 2026

----

UCO Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies

(Acquisition and transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 having its Head Office

at 8

th

Floor, 10 B.T.M. Sarani, Kolkata 700001 and Branches, interalia, at

Jugsalai, PO & PS Jugsalai, Jamshedpur District : East Singhbhum, PIN

831006, acting through its Branch Manager, Richa, W/o Sri Gautam Kumar,

B/o UCO Bank, Jugsalai Branch, Station Road, PO + PS Jugsalai,

Jamshedpur, Dist East Singhbhum, Jharkhand 831006.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Principal Secretary, Home

Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa,

Ranchi 834004.

2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, PO + PS Sakchi, District

East Singhbhum, Jharkhand.

3. Mr. Amit Kumar son of Ajit Kumar, resident of LBSM Road, Ghagidih,

Harharguttu, PO & PS Bagbera, Jamshedpur 831002, District East

Singhbhum.

4. Mrs. Sangita Kumari wife of Amit Kumar, resident of LBSM Road,

Ghagidih, Harharguttu, PO & PS Bagbera, Jamshedpur 831002, District

East Singhbhum.

… … Respondents

----

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4388 of 2026

----

Jana Small Finance Bank Limited, a Company incorporated under the

Companies Act, 1956 and having obtained Banking License from the

Reserve Bank of India and governed under the Banking Regulation Act,

1949, having its Registered Office at the Fairway Business Park 10/1, 11/2

and 12/2B Off Domlur, Koramangala Inner Ring Road, Next to Embassay

Golf Links, Challaghatta, PO - Koramangala VI Block, PS - HAL, District -

Bangalore, Karnataka 560071 and its Branch Office at Jana Small Finance

Bank Ltd., Galaxia Mall, Ratu Road, PO - Hehal, PS - Sukhdeonagar,

District Ranchi, Jharkhand 834005, through its Authorized Officer Mr.

Neeraj Kumar son of Ram Pravesh Tiwari, resident of Parahuti, PO -

Akhtiarpur, PS - Kargahar, District - Rohtas, Bihar 821108.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner cum District

Magistrate, Dhanbad, having his Office at Collectorate Building, Near

Head Post Office, PO - Dhanbad Head Post Office, PS - Dhanbad

Police Station, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand 826001.

2. The Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate, Dhanbad, having

Office at Collectorate Building, Near Head Post Office, PO - Dhanbad

Head Post Office, PS - Dhanbad Police Station, District - Dhanbad,

Jharkhand 826001.

3. M/s Atish Saree Repairing Shop a proprietorship concern of Mr. Atish

Chandra Shaw, at Niche Bazar, Nirsa Cum Chirkunda, PO & PS -

Chirkunda, District - Dhanbad, Jharkhand 828202.

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 3 :-

4. Mrs. Shashi Sevi wife of Atish Chandra Shaw, resident of Niche Bazar,

Nirsa Cum Chirkunda, PO & PS - Chirkunda, District - Dhanbad,

Jharkhand 828202.

… … Respondents

----

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4476 of 2026

----

Canara Bank, represented through its Authorised Officer, Specialised

A.R.M. Branch, being Mr. Keshava Ranjan, son of Kamlesh Kumar

Choudhary, both having their Office at “Canara Bank”, ARMB Branch, Pee

Pee Compound, P.O. GPO & P.S. Lower Bazar, District : Ranchi.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Jharkhand

2. District Magistrate cum Dy. Commissioner, Dhanbad having its Office at

Collectoriate, PO & PS Dhanbad, District Dhanbad.

3. Rakesh Kumar, son of Om Prakash, resident of Flat No.5C, Fifth Floor,

Shanti Apartment, Kusumvihar, BCCL Township, PO & PS Dhanbad,

District Dhanbad.

… … Respondents

----

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4666 of 2026

----

HDFC Bank Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act,

1956, carrying on banking business under License Granted by Reserve

Bank of India and registered under Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having

its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower

Parel (West) P.O. Delisle Road, P.S.- Dadar, Mumbai 400013, represented

through its duly authorised representative Shubham Jaiswal, S/o Late

Ramesh Jaiswal, at present working for gain as “Legal Manager” at HDFC

Bank Ltd., having one of its branches situated amongst other places at

HDFC Bank Limited, Department for special operations, Jardine House, 1

st

Floor, 4, Clive Row, PO GPO, PS Hare Street, District Kolkata (West

Bengal) 700001.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. District Magistrate cum Dy. Commissioner, Dumka New Collectorate

Building, Dumka, PO, PS & District Dumka.

3. M/s Ranju Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. A Pvt. Ltd. Company through one of its

Director Basudeo Mishra, having its Registered Office at Vinay Vatika,

Bye Lane, Ranchi Road, PO & PS Purlia, District Purlia (West Bengal)

723101 and one of its branch office situated at Western Avenue, Naya

More, Bokaro Steel City, PO & PS Bokaro Steel City, District Bokaro,

Jharkhand 827001.

4. Basudeo Mishra, S/o Sukhendu Shekhar Mishra, resident of House

No.91, Main Road Chas, PO & PS Chas, District Bokaro, Jharkhand

827013.

5. Mr. Nitesh Kumar Mishra, S/o Late B.P. Mishra, resident of House No.C-

23, Ashiyana C Block, Near Durga Mandir, Engineers Enclave, Chira

PO & PS Chas, District Bokaro, Jharkhand 827013.

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 4 :-

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4723 of 2026

----

HDFC Bank Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act,

1956, carrying on banking business under License Granted by Reserve

Bank of India and registered under Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having

its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower

Parel (West), Mumbai 400013, represented through its duly authorised

representative Shubham Jaiswal, S/o Late Ramesh Jaiswal, at present

working for gain as “Legal Manager” at HDFC Bank Ltd., having one of its

branches situated amongst other places at HDFC Bank Limited,

Department for special operations, Jardine House, 1

st

Floor, 4, Clive Row,

PO GPO, PS Hare Street, District Kolkata (West Bengal) 700001.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. District Magistrate cum Dy. Commissioner, Dumka New Collectorate

Building, Dumka, PO, PS & District Dumka.

3. M/s Basuki Steel Pvt. Ltd., a private ltd. Company, through its director

Mr. Pradeep Kumar Kalbalia, having its registered Office at Room

No.4N, Fourth Floor, Perfect Business Centre, 36 G.C. Avenue, Kolkata

West Bengal, Pin 700013 and having one of its Branch Office amongst

other places at Basuki Kutir, Near Jain Ice Factory, Main Road, Chas,

PO & PS Chas, District Bokaro (Jharkhand) 827013.

4. Pradip Kumar Kalbalia, S/o R.S. Kalbalia, Resident of Basuki Kutir, Near

Jain Ice Factory, Main Road, Chas, PO & PS Chas, District Bokaro,

Jharkhand 827013.

5. Anita Devi Kalbalia, D/o Gulab Chandra Tibrewal, resident of Basuki

Kutir, Near Jain Ice Factory, Main Road, Chas, PO & PS Chas, District

Bokaro, Jharkhand 827013.

6. Prateek Kalbalia, S/o Pradeep Kumar Kalbalia, resident of Basuki Kutir,

Near Jain Ice Factory Main Road, Chas, PO & PS Chas, District Bokaro,

Jharkhand 827013.

7. Axis Bank Ltd. A company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956,

carrying on banking business under license granted by Reserve Bank of

India and registered under Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its

registered office at “Trishul” 3

rd

Floor, Opposite Samartheswar Temple,

Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad 380006, through its

Managing Director and one of its Branch Office amongst other places at

Axis Bank Ltd., SME East Geography Kolkata 1, Shakespear Sarani, 3

rd

Floor, SME Department, AC Market, PO & PS Shakespear Sarani,

District Kolkata, West Bengal 700017.

… … Respondents

----

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 4735 of 2026

----

Yashoda Hospital & Research Centre Ltd a company registered under the

Companies Act, 2013 and having its registered office at Kf 09, Kavi Nagar,

PO & PS Ghaziabad, Ghaziabad represented through its Authorised

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 5 :-

Signatory Rajesh Kumar Pandey S/o Krishna Kumar Pandey, R/o Vill

Jagadevpur, Janaupur, PO & PS Janaupur, Ballia 277123.

… … Petitioner

Versus

1. The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank (Allahabad) SAM Branch, Ranchi,

having its Office at Paras Complex, Third Floor, Lalpur, Chowk, Circular

Road, PO and PS - Lalpur, Town and District - Ranchi.

2. Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Deoghar, having his

office at Deputy Commissioner’s Office, PO, PS and District Deoghar,

Jharkhand 814112.

3. Superintendent of Police, Deoghar, having his Office at Police Office,

PO, PS and District - Deoghar, Jharkhand 814112.

… … Respondents

----

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

----

For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate

Ms. Shreya Shukla, Advocate

[in WP(C) No. 4735 of 2026]

Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate

[in WP(C) No. 4307 of 2026 & WP(C) No. 4476 of 2026]

Mr. Neelanjan Chatterjee, Advocate

Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate

[in WP(C) No. 4385 of 2026]

Mr. Akchansh Kishore, Advocate

Mr. Sanchit Sinha, Advocate

[in WP(C) No. 4388 of 2026]

Mr. Ashish Jha, Advocate

[in WP(C) No. 4666 of 2026 & WP(C) No. 4723 of 2026]

For the Respondents: Mr. Rohitashya Roy, Advocate General

Mr. Vibhor Mayank, AC to AG

Ms. Omiya Anusha, AC to AAG-IA

Mr. Ankit Kumar, AC to SC-I

Mr. Shubham Mishra, AC to SC (Mines) II

Ms. Apoorva Singh, AC to SC (Mines) II

Mr. Baibhav Gahlaut,

[for State respondents]

Ms. Amrita Sinha, Advocate

Ms. Shweta Suman, Advocate

Ms. Pragunee Kashyap, Advocate

[For Respondent No.1 in WP(C) No.4735 of 2026]

----

O R D E R

RESERVED ON 08.07.2026 PRONOUNCED ON: 15.07.2026

In all these batch of writ petitions, only prayer made by the

respective writ petitioners is that their applications under Section 14 of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “the SARFAESI Act”),

which each of the writ petitioners have filed, are pending before the respective

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 6 :-

authorities, who are supposed to dispose of the same, be directed to dispose

of such applications, as expeditiously as possible as those applications are

pending since long.

2. It is their grievance that the petitioners being financial institutions

are entitled to take possession of the secured assets of the borrowers for

which they had sought assistance from the District Magistrate or Chief Judicial

Magistrates, but their applications are kept pending much beyond the statutory

period, which is creating hindrance in taking possession of the property, which

in turn is creating hurdle in recovery.

3. Since at the stage of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, there is no

role of borrowers and they are not the necessary party, there is no necessity of

issuing notice to them.

4 The petitioners herein are the financial institutions and are the

secured creditors in respect of the property, which were mortgaged with them.

5. In all the cases, facts are admitted. It is not necessary to give

details of all the mortgages and the outstanding amounts etc., considering the

limited prayer, which the petitioners have made by filing these writ petitions.

6. Admittedly, the assets of the borrowers are mortgaged with these

financial institutions and the respective borrowers are in default. As the

borrowers are in default, the financial institutions, in some cases have taken

symbolic possession of the secured assets, but now the borrowers want to

take physical possession of the secured assets for which they have

approached the District Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate. It is their

argument that the District Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot

keep their applications filed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act pending for

an indefinite period. As per them, the timeline should be followed and the

statutory authority should take all endeavour to dispose of the same as early

as possible to facilitate taking over possession of the properties so that they

can be auctioned or be handed over to the auction purchasers, as the case

may be. It is their prayer that a direction be given to the authorities, to dispose

of their applications under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act at the earliest, and

mandamus be issued upon them that in future, these applications be disposed

without any delay.

7. Learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State does

not deny the statutory obligation of the authorities under the SARFAESI Act to

assist the secured creditors to take possession of the properties. He submits

that the Deputy Commissioner/District Magistrates are over-burdened with

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 7 :-

different types of works, which includes development of Districts, work related

to revenue and others, which delays disposal of these applications. He submits

that in some cases, once an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI

Act is filed by the Bank, the Deputy Commissioner is to cause an enquiry

about the title and also the possession of the properties and has to decide as

to whether the transfer of the property by way of mortgage or any other means

was in violation of any law or not. He submits that to arrive at a definite

conclusion and to decide such issues, some time is consumed by them. He

submits that no matter whatever the situation is, application needs to be

disposed of at the earliest. It is his contention that time schedule mentioned

under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is, directory in nature, thus, officers

cannot be forced to dispose of the applications, strictly within the timeframe as

mentioned in Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act itself.

8. On the direction of this Court, the Deputy Commissioners (District

Magistrates) of some of the districts of the State had appeared through virtual

mode to assist this Court. Those Deputy Commissioners were asked to join

through virtual mode for the reason that there are large number of applications

under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, are pending before them, yet to be

disposed. The Deputy Commissioners also submitted that they have to look

into the correctness and validity of the transfer and then only they can take a

decision on such applications, which consumes much time.

9. After hearing the parties, I find that admittedly, applications under

Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, in all these cases, are pending since long. A

report was called for from all the District Magistrates of the State about the

pendency of applications under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. From the

report, I find that in the District of Ranchi, there are 146 applications pending,

in Bokaro there are 65, in Hazaribagh there are 64, in Dhanbad there are 308,

in East Singhbhum (Jamshedpur) there are 203. In rest of the districts, the

figure is in single digit. Pendency of the applications in these 5 (five) districts,

mentioned above, is really alarming. A report was called from the Chief

Judicial Magistrates as well. As per the report, the number of applications

pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur is 59, which is also

alarming. Admittedly, all these aplications are pending beyond the statutory

period.

10. The SARFAESI Act was promulgated by the Parliament of India to

regulate securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement

of security interest and to provide for a central database of security interests

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 8 :-

created on property rights, and for matters connected therewith or incidental

thereto. From the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the said Act, it is

understood that in certain areas the banking and financial sector did not have

a level playing field as compared to other participants in the financial markets

in the world. There was no legal provision for facilitating securitization of

financial assets of banks and financial institutions. It was also felt that unlike

international banks, the banks and financial institutions in India did not have

power to take possession of securities and sell them. The then existing legal

framework relating to commercial transactions did not keep pace with the

changing commercial practices and financial sector reforms. This led to slow

pace of recovery of defaulting loans and mounting levels of non-performing

assets of banks and financial institutions. Narasimham Committee I and II and

Andhyarujina Committee was constituted to examine all these aspects and the

grey areas, which suggested enactment of a new legislation to empower the

banks and financial institutions to take possession of the securities and sell

them without intervention of the Courts. Accepting the said suggestions and

acting upon them, The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Ordinance, 2002 was promulgated on

21

st

June, 2002. The provisions of the said Ordinance was to enable the Banks

and Financial Institutions to realize long-term assets, manage problem of

liquidity, asset liability mismatches and improve recovery by exercising powers

to take possession of securities, sell them and reduce non-performing assets

by adopting measures for recovery or reconstruction. The said Ordinance was

replaced by a Bill and the Act was promulgated.

11. One of the main thrust in the legislation was to empower banks

and financial institutions to take possession of the securities given for financial

assistance, sell them and take over the management. In this context, it is

necessary to remind that the bank is none, but a trustee of public funds. Public

interest cannot be compromised for benefitting private individuals. The

borrowers, who take loan are bound to repay the same in accordance with the

terms of the contract and the laches should be viewed seriously. This is a

cause of enactment of this statute.

12. Section 2(1)(zb) of the Act defines “security agreement”, Section

2(1)(zc) defines “secured asset”, Section 2(1)(zd) defines “secured creditor”,

Section 2(1)(ze) defines “secured debt” and Section 2(1)(zf) defines “security

interest”. Chapter III of the SARFAESI Act deals with “Enforcement of Security

Interest”. Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, under the said Chapter, provides

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 9 :-

for “Enforcement of Security Interest”. As per the said provision a security

interest created in favour of any secured creditor may be enforced by the said

Secured Creditor without the intervention of the Court or Tribunal

(emphasis supplied by Court). This means that wide power has been conferred

upon the secured creditor to enforce their right over the secured interest,

without seeking any intervention of the Court/Tribunal. This means that without

approaching the Court/Tribunal, without taking any order from the

Court/Tribunal, the Secured Creditor can take possession of the secured

assets. This also means that some supremacy is given to the decision of the

secured creditor to take possession of the secured assets. It only suggests

that this decision solely rests on the secured creditor. The only rider is that the

same should be in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Sub Section (2)

of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act provides that once the debt is classified as

non-performing assets by the secured creditor, the creditor has to issue a

notice in writing to the borrower to discharge his liability in full within 60 (sixty)

days from the date of the notice. As per the said provision, if the liability is not

discharged within 60 (sixty) days, the secured creditor is entitled to exercise all

or any of the rights under sub-section (4). As per Section 13 sub Section (3),

this notice shall contain the details of the amount payable by the borrower and

the secured assets intended to be enforced by the secured creditor in the

event of non-payment of secured debt by the borrower. In terms of Section

13(3-A), the secured creditor has a duty to dispose of the representation or the

objection raised, if any, by the borrower and communicate the decision and the

reasons for non-acceptance of the representation or objections to the

borrower. The proviso to the aforesaid Sub Section mandates that the reasons

so communicated or the likely action of the secured creditor at the stage of

communication of reasons shall not confer any right upon the borrower to

prefer an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 or the

Court of District Judge under Section 17-A. The right of a borrower has thus

been extinguished. As per Section 13(4) and Section 13(4)(a) of the

SARFAESI Act, if the borrower fails to discharge his liability mentioned in

Section 13(2) of the Act, the secured creditor can take recourse to one or more

actions or take measures as provided under the Act to recover the secured

debt. One of such measures is to take physical possession of the secured

assets of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease,

assignment or sale.

13. It is necessary to quote only the relevant portion of Section 13 of

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 10 :-

the SARFAESI Act, which reads as under:-

13. Enforcement of security interest. – (1) Notwithstanding

anything contained in section 69 or section 69-A of the Transfer

of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), any security interest created in

favour of any secured creditor may be enforced, without the

intervention of the Court or tribunal, by such creditor in

accordance with the provisions of this Act.

(2) Where any borrower, who is under a liability to a

secured creditor under a security agreement, makes any default

in repayment of secured debt or any instalment thereof, and his

account in respect of such debt is classified by the secured

creditor as non-performing asset, then, the secured creditor may

require the borrower by notice in writing to discharge in full his

liabilities to the secured creditor within sixty days from the date

of notice failing which the secured creditor shall be entitled to

exercise all or any of the rights under sub-section (4);

Provided that-

(i) …

(ii) …

(3) The notice preferred to in sub-section (2) shall give

details of the amount payable by the borrower and the secured

assets intended to be enforced by the secured creditor in the

event of non-payment of secured debts by the borrower.

(3-A) If, on receipt of the notice under sub-section (2), the

borrower makes any representation or raises any objection, the

secured creditor shall consider such representation or objection

and if the secured creditor comes to the conclusion that such

representation or objection is not acceptable or tenable, he shall

communicate within fifteen days of receipt of such representation

or objection the reasons for non-acceptance of the

representation or objection to the borrower:

Provided that the reasons so communicated or the likely

action of the secured creditor at the stage of communication of

reasons shall not confer any right upon the borrower to prefer an

application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17 or

the Court of District Judge under section 17-A.

(4) In case the borrower fails to discharge his liability in

full within the period specified in sub-section(2), the secured

creditor may take recourse to one or more of the following

measures to recover his secured debt, namely:-

(a) take possession of the secured assets of the borrower

including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale

for realizing the secured asset;

(b) …

Provided …

Provided further …

… …”

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 11 :-

14. Thus, from Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act it is clear that the

power exclusively vests with the secured creditor to take possession of the

secured asset in the event of non-payment of secured debts within the

specified statutory period and on rejection of the objection. This is without the

intervention of any Court or Tribunal.

15. Now, once the financial institution/secured creditor takes a

decision to take possession of the secured assets, they can proceed for doing

so. Secured creditor can take possession of the assets by themselves. In

some given cases, though rare, they do not even need any assistance of any

authority. There may be situations in given cases, where they may not face

obstructions or there may not be any law and order problem. In those scenario,

the secured creditor can very well take possession of the assets, without any

external assistance. In cases, situation may arise where it is necessary for the

secured creditor to take assistance of the State agencies to take possession of

the secured assets. Once they feel that such assistance is required, they have

to take resort of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Section 14 of the

SARFAESI Act casts a duty upon the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the

District Magistrate to assist the secured creditors in taking possession of the

secured assets.

16. Heading of Section 14 reveals that the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate and the District Magistrate’s duty is to assist the secured creditor in

taking possession. Legislature, in its wisdom, has used the word ‘assist’

considering the nature of the duty, which they are to perform under the

aforesaid provisions of law. The statute also provides that where the

possession of secured assets has to be taken or if it is required to be sold /

transferred then a request has to be made by the secured creditor for

assistance, to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate for

the purpose of taking possession of such assets or other documents relating

thereto. The duty of the secured creditor is to file an affidavit along with the

application, duly affirmed by the authorized officer of the secured creditor,

making some declarations. Declarations to be made in the affidavit are

enumerated in Clause (i) to (ix) to the proviso to Section 14(1) of the

SARFAESI Act.

17. Once an affidavit divulging the required information, under the

statute, is filed, it is the duty of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District

Magistrate to satisfy himself about the content of the affidavit and thereafter

pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 12 :-

assets.

18. A timeframe is mentioned in Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act to

perform the said duty, which is 30 days. The proviso of the said section

obligates that if the order cannot be passed within 30 days, then by recording

reasons as to why it was not possible to pass order within 30 days, and that

the reasons were beyond the control of the District Magistrate or the Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, the order can be passed, within a period which should

not exceed 60 days in aggregate. This means a further 30 days’ time, beyond

the initial 30 days, is granted by the statute to pass the order.

19. Here it is pertinent to take note that in all these cases, in hand, the

applications under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act are pending for more than

60 days.

20. What is the scope of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has been

discussed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama

Tarle versus Phoenix Arc Private Limited and Others reported in (2023) 1

SCC 662. In paragraph 14 of the aforesaid judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court while noting the provisions of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, at

paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 has held as under: -

“14. Section 14 of the Sarfaesi Act reads as under:

“14. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate

to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured

asset.- (1) Where the possession of any secured asset 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 authorized officer of the secured creditor,

declaring that-

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 13 :-

(i) the aggregate amount of financial assistance

granted and the total claim of the Bank as on the date of

filing the application;

(ii) the borrower has created security interest over

various properties and that the Bank or Financial

Institution is holding a valid and subsisting security

interest over such properties and the claim of the Bank or

Financial Institution is within the limitation period;

(iii) the borrower has created security interest

over various properties giving the details of properties

referred to in sub-clause (ii) above;

(iv) the borrower has committed default in

repayment of the financial assistance granted

aggregating the specified amount;

(v) consequent upon such default in repayment of

the financial assistance the account of the borrower has

been classified as a non-performing asset;

(vi) affirming that the period of sixty days’ notice

as required by the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section

13, demanding payment of the defaulted financial

assistance has been served on the borrower;

(vii) the objection or representation in reply to the

notice received from the borrower has been considered

by the secured creditor and reasons for non-acceptance

of such objection or representation had been

communicated to the borrower;

(viii) the borrower has not made any repayment of

the financial assistance in spite of the above notice and

the Authorised Officer is, therefore, entitled to take

possession of the secured assets under the provisions of

sub-section (4) of Section 13 read with Section 14 of the

principal Act;

(ix) that the provisions of this Act and the rules

made thereunder had been complied with;

Provided further that on receipt of the affidavit

from the Authorised Officer, the District Magistrate or the

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, shall

after satisfying the contents of the affidavit pass suitable

orders for the purpose of taking possession of the

secured assets [within a period of thirty days from the

date of application];

[Provided also that if no order is passed by the

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate within

the said period of thirty days for reasons beyond his

control, he may, after recording reasons in writing for the

same, pass the order within such further period but not

exceeding in aggregate sixty days.]

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 14 :-

Provided also that the requirement of filing

affidavit stated in the first proviso shall not apply to

proceeding pending before any District Magistrate or the

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, on the

date of commencement of this Act.

[(1-A) The District Magistrate or the Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate may authorize any officer

subordinate to him-

(i) to take possession of such assets and

documents relating thereto; and

(ii) to forward such assets and documents to the

secured creditor.]

(2) For the purpose of securing compliance with

the provisions of sub-section (1), the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate or the District Magistrate may take or cause to

be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such

force, as may, in his opinion, be necessary.

(3) No act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or

the District Magistrate [any officer authorized by the Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate] done in

pursuance of this section shall be called in question in

any court or before any authority.”

15. On a fair reading of Section 14 of the Sarfaesi Act, it appears

that for taking possession of the secured assets in terms of

Section 14(1) of the Sarfaesi Act, the secured creditor is obliged

to approach the District Magistrate/ Chief Metropolitan Magistrate

by way of a written application requesting for taking possession

of the secured assets and documents relating thereto and for

being forwarded to it (secured creditor) for further action.

16. The statutory obligation enjoined upon the CMM/DM is to

immediately move into action after receipt of a written application

under Section 14(1) of the Sarfaesi Act from the secured creditor

for that purpose. As soon as such an application is received, the

CMM/DM is expected to pass an order after verification of

compliance of all formalities by the secured creditor referred to in

the proviso in Section 14(1) of the Sarfaesi Act and after being

satisfied in that regard, to take possession of the secured assets

and documents relating thereto and to forward the same to the

secured creditor at the earliest opportunity. As observed and

held by this Court in NKGSB Coop. Bank Ltd. V. Subir

Chakravarty, the aforesaid act is a ministerial act. It cannot brook

delay. Time is of the essence and this is the spirit of the special

enactment.

17. In the recent decision in R.D. Jain & Co. v. Capital First Ltd.,

this Court had an occasion to consider the powers exercisable by

District Magistrate/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section

14 of the Sarfaesi Act. After considering the object and purpose

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 15 :-

of Section 14 of the Sarfaesi Act and the scheme of the Act under

Section 14, it is observed and held in paras 18 to 26 as under:

… …”

21. The aforesaid judgment has emphasized that “time is the essence

and is the spirit of special enactment”.

22. In the case of C. Bright versus District Collector and Others

reported in (2021) 2 SCC 392, at paragraph 21, the Hon’ble Supreme Court

has held that the purpose of the Act pertains to speedy recovery of the dues of

the bank and financial institutions. Intention of the legislation is the determining

factor. Keeping the objective of the Act in mind, the time limit to take action has

been fixed. It has also been held that inability to take possession within the

time limit does not render the District Magistrate functus officio. The secured

creditor has no control over the District Magistrate, who is exercising the

jurisdiction under Section 14 of the Act for public good to facilitate recovery of

public dues. Failure to comply with the timelines of 30 days and 60 days

cannot be said to frustrate the action, which a District Magistrate needs to take

in terms of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court interpreted the aforesaid

provision, considering the object and purpose of the Act, rather than

interpreting the Act literally. It has held that any other interpretation contrary

would run to the detriment of the Act. The duty casted upon the Magistrate is

to make an earnest effort to comply with the mandate of the statute and in the

event if he fails to do so, remedy does not become redundant. District

Magistrate still has to facilitate delivery of the possession by invoking

jurisdiction under Section 14 of the Act. It is necessary to quote paragraph 21

of the aforesaid judgment, which reads as under: -

“21. The Act was enacted to provide a machinery for empowering

banks and financial institutions, so that they may have the power

to take possession of secured assets and to sell them. The DRT

Act was first enacted to streamline the recovery of public dues

but the proceedings under the said Act have not given desirous

results. Therefore, the Act in question was enacted. This Court in

Mardia Chemicals, Transcore and Hindon Forge (P) Ltd. has held

that the purpose of the Act pertains to speedy recovery of dues,

by banks and financial institutions. The true intention of the

legislature is a determining factor herein. Keeping the objective

of the Act in mind, the time-limit to take action by the District

Magistrate has been fixed to impress upon the authority to take

possession of the secured assets. However, inability to take

possession within time-limit does not render the District

Magistrate functus officio. The secured creditor has no control

over the District Magistrate who is exercising jurisdiction under

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 16 :-

Section 14 of the Act for public good to facilitate recovery of

public dues. Therefore, Section 14 of the Act is not to be

interpreted literally without considering the object and purpose of

the Act. If any other interpretation is placed upon the language of

Section 14, it would be contrary to the purpose of the Act. The

time-limit is to instill a confidence in creditors that the District

Magistrate will make an attempt to deliver possession as well as

to impose a duty on the District Magistrate to make an earnest

effort to comply with the mandate of the statute to deliver the

possession within 30 days and for reasons to be recorded within

60 days. In this light, the remedy under Section 14 of the Act is

not rendered redundant if the District Magistrate is unable to

handover the possession. The District Magistrate will still be

enjoined upon, the duty to facilitate delivery of possession at the

earliest.”

23. This clearly reflects the true purpose of the Act and the nature of

the timeline so fixed. Timeline so fixed can be said to be directory. Thus it has

to be interpreted that the timeline to perform duty is directory and if it is not

fulfilled within the said time, the District Magistrate does not become functus

officio, rather he has to complete the statutory duty vested upon him. Not only

he is vested with the duty to pass an order under Section 14 of the Act and

ensure assistance to take possession of the secured assets, but in view of the

order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s India Infoline

Home Finance Limited versus Nageswara Rao Perikala and Ors. [order

dated March 16, 2026 in S.L.P.(C) No. 26160 of 2025], the Chief Judicial

Magistrate has the statutory obligation to ensure that the warrant of

possession is executed and the secured creditor is not required to run from

pillar to post.

24. In this context, it is necessary to take note of the observations

made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Standard Chartered Bank

versus V. Noble Kumar and Others reported in (2013) 9 SCC 620, at

paragraph 20 and 21 thereof, which read as under: -

“20. In every case where the objections raised by the borrower

are rejected by the secured creditor, the secured creditor is

entitled to take possession of the secured assets. In our opinion,

such action – having regard to the object and scheme of the Act –

could be taken directly by the secured creditor. However,

visualizing the possibility of resistance for such action,

Parliament under Section 14 also provided for seeking the

assistance of the judicial power of the State for obtaining

possession of the secured asset, in those cases where the

secured creditor seeks it.

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 17 :-

21. Under the scheme of Section 14, a secured creditor who

desires to seek the assistance of the State’s coercive power for

obtaining possession of the secured asset is required to make a

request in writing to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District

Magistrate within whose jurisdiction, the secured asset is located

praying that the secured asset and other documents relating

thereto may be taken possession thereof. The language of

Section 14 originally enacted purportedly obliged the Magistrate

receiving a request under Section 14 to take possession of the

secured asset and documents, if any, related thereto in terms of

the request received by him without any further scrutiny of the

matter.”

25. Thus, it is the duty of the Chief Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate /

District Magistrate first to make an endeavour to dispose of the application

within timeline provided by the statute and if not, to dispose of the application

as expeditiously as possible without keeping the application pending for a

considerable period of time. If the same is kept pending, it will only frustrate

the purpose of the Act and not only that, it will also give undue benefit and

advantage to the defaulters, which is not the intent of the Act. Once the

process has been started by the Authority, the Authority must take it to its

logical conclusion without delay. If there is delay, the reasons for the same has

also to be recorded. This is the intent of Section 14 of the Act.

26. The next question, which arises for consideration, is based on the

arguments advanced by learned Advocate General and the Deputy

Commissioners. It was their contention that they have to look into the title of

the property and in some cases to look into the genuineness and legality of the

transfer and also whether any transfer is prohibited by any law or not. In this

context, it has to be noted that any type of adjudication is beyond the purview

and scope of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and also beyond the jurisdiction

of the authority. The statute has not vested upon them to adjudicate any issue.

Nature of duty, which they perform under this Statute is, purely, ministerial in

nature and is not adjudicatory by any means, nor can they even make any

roving enquiry about the title or the nature of transfer of the property. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama Tarle (supra) at

paragraph 18 has held that the power exercised by the District Magistrate

under Section 14 of the Act does not involve any adjudicatory process qua

points raised by the borrowers against the secured creditor. Once all the

requirements under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act are fulfilled and complied

with and satisfied by the secured creditor, it is the duty of the District

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 18 :-

Magistrate to assist the secured creditor in taking possession of the asets

which are secured. Paragraph 18 of the aforesaid judgment reads as under: -

“18. Thus, the powers exercisable by CMM/DM under Section 14

of the Sarfaesi Act are ministerial steps and Section 14 does not

involve any adjudicatory process qua points raised by the

borrowers against the secured creditor taking possession of the

secured assets. In that view of the matter once all the

requirements under Section 14 of the Sarfaesi Act are complied

with/satisfied by the secured creditor, it is the duty cast upon the

CMM/DM to assist the secured creditor in obtaining the

possession as well as the documents related to the secured

assets even with the help of any officer subordinate to him and/or

with the help of an advocate appointed as Advocate

Commissioner. At that stage, the CMM/DM is not required to

adjudicate the dispute between the borrower and the secured

creditor and/or between any other third party and the secured

creditor with respect to the secured assets and the aggrieved

party to be relegated to raise objections in the proceedings under

Section 17 of the Sarfaesi Act, before the Debts Recovery

Tribunal.”

27. This Court also in W.P.(C) No. 2182 of 2026 [Tata Capital

Housing Finance Limited versus State of Jharkhand & Others] and

W.P.(C) No.5133 of 2023 [Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited versus

State of Jharkhand & Others] has held that the District Magistrate is not an

adjudicatory authority. His duty is only to assist the creditor in taking

possession of the property peacefully and if there is any obstruction by any

person, then to take appropriate action.

28. It is also clear and beyond any doubt that the borrower has got no

role to play at the stage of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act nor any right has

been given to him to take part, in any manner, in the said proceeding. There is

no scope of compliance or application of principle of natural justice at the stage

of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, so far as borrowers are concerned, which

is evident from the intention of the Act itself. His only right is to approach the

Debts Recovery Tribunal by invoking Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Authorised Officer, Indian Bank

versus D. Visalakshi and Another reported in (2019) 20 SCC 47 at

paragraph 37 has held as under: -

“37. Notably, the powers and functions of CMM and CJM are

equivalent and similar, in relation to matters specified in CrPC.

These expressions (CMM and CJM) are interchangeable and

synonymous to each other. Moreover, Section 14 of the 2002 Act

does not explicitly exclude CJM from dealing with the request of

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 19 :-

the secured creditor made thereunder. The power to be exercised

under Section 14 of the 2002 Act by the authority concerned is,

by its very nature, non-judicial or State’s coercive power.

Furthermore, the borrower or the persons claiming through

borrower or for that matter likely to be affected by the proposed

action being in possession of the subject property, have

statutory remedy under Section 17 of the 2002 Act and/or judicial

review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In that

sense, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the borrower/lessee;

nor is it possible to suggest that they are rendered remediless in

law. At the same time, the secured creditor who invokes the

process under Section 14 of the 2002 Act does not get any

advantage much less added advantage. Taking totality of all

these aspects, there is nothing wrong in giving expansive

meaning to the expression “CMM”, as inclusive of CJM

concerning non-metropolitan area, who is otherwise competent

to discharge administrative as well as judicial functions as

delineated in CrPC on the same terms as CMM. That

interpretation would make the provision more meaningful. Such

interpretation does not militate against the legislative intent nor it

would be a case of allowing an unworthy person or authority to

undertake inquiry which is limited to matters specified in Section

14 of the 2002 Act.”

29. Be it noted that, in the aforesaid paragraph, it has also been held

that powers and functions of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Chief

Judicial Magistrate are similar in the Code of Criminal Procedure.

30. A point has been raised by the learned Advocate General and the

Deputy Commissioners that in some cases under the Chota Nagpur Tenancy

Act (for short ‘CNT Act), the District Magistrates exercise role of guardian of

tribal land and as there are bar in transfer of tribal land, subject to some

provisions, the District Magistrate under the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act has to

decide the correctness of transfer also. This decision takes time.

31. From what has been held above and from the provisions of law

and the judgments discussed above, the Deputy Commissioners or the District

Magistrates have no power to look into this aspect also, while exercising

jurisdiction under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. No doubt, they are the

guardian of tribal land under the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act, but these

provisions of CNT Act and SARFAESI Act cannot be intermingled, merged and

applied together. The Deputy Commissioner, who enjoys several powers

under different statute by virtue of his designation, has to exercise his

jurisdiction and powers in respect of each of the statutes separately and

cannot combine or blend them. He cannot assume the adjudicatory power

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 20 :-

vested in him under the CNT Act while exercising jurisdiction under the

SARFAESI Act. Both operates on different jurisdiction, not to be mixed up.

The provisions of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, itself, is sufficient. To

buttress the said proposition, reliance on the provisions of Section 14 of the

SARFAESI Act needs to be placed.

32. An application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act can be filed

before the District Magistrate and can also be filed before the Chief Judicial

Magistrate. Both of them enjoy concurrent jurisdiction. None enjoys more

power than the other. It is the choice of the Financial Institution to choose the

forum. A Chief Judicial Magistrate is not the guardian of Tribal Land as per

CNT Act. He does not enjoy similar jurisdiction under the CNT Act, which the

District Magistrate enjoys. A Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot declare a transfer

to be void or bad under the CNT Act. Thus, if the submission of the State is

accepted, then there will be an anamolous situation. Anomally would be that if

the application is filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he will naturally be

barred in examining correctness of the transfer while the District Magistrate will

enquire into the correctness and genuinity of the transfer. This anamoly will

amount to vesting of additional power upon the District Magistrate, which the

Chief Judicial Magistrate does not enjoy under the CNT Act. A provision of law,

which bestows concurrent jurisdiction on two authorities, the power and

jurisdiction to be exercised by both the Authorities will be exactly the same.

None of them can have more power than the other. In this context, reference

may be made to paragraph 18 of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Uco Bank and Another versus Dipak

Debbarma and Others reported in (2017) 2 SCC 585. Thus, this argument of

the respondents-State is rejected.

33. As mentioned, the Deputy Commissioners were requested to

assist this Court. They had appeared virtually. The Deputy Commissioner,

Ranchi has assured this Court that he will dispose of the pending applications

within six weeks; the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh within 4 weeks; the

Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro within four weeks; Deputy Commissioner,

Dhanbad within 8 weeks; Deputy Commissioner, Jamshedpur within 8 weeks.

34. Considering their submissions and undertakings, they are directed

to dispose of the pending applications under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act,

within the period, which they had undertaken. So far as rest of the Deputy

Commissioners of remaining districts are concerned, as per the report handed

over by the learned Advocate General and their submissions, they are directed

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 21 :-

to dispose of the pending applications under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act

within three weeks from today.

35. There are matters pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrates

also. Before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, there are 24 applications

pending and before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur there are 59

applications pending, and those are pending since long. It has also been

brought to the notice of this Court that these applications are instituted as

Misc. Case matters and are heard like a judicial proceeding. In some Courts,

cases are registered as Criminal Miscellaneous. This type of registration is

also not proper. Since this is not an adjudicatory duty of the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, these applications cannot be registered as Criminal Miscellaneous.

On filing of such application, they should not be registered as a case before

them, as is done on the judicial side. Only a Register should be maintained by

them separately, which will contain the serial numbers of each of the

application as per the dates they have been received and the Chief Judicial

Magistrate will dispose of those applications on the administrative side. If for

the sake of convenience some number has to be assigned, same should be

numbered as a “SARFAESI Applications”, but by no means it should be dealt

as done in judicial side. It is only a ministerial act, which they are performing.

As observed earlier, nature of duty, which they perform under the Statute is

ministerial and is not adjudicatory by any means, nor can they make any

roving enquiry about the title or the nature of transfer of the property. The

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Balkrishna Rama Tarle (supra) at

paragraph 18 has held that the power exercised by the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate/District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Act does not involve any

adjudicatory process qua points raised by the borrowers against the secured

creditor, thus, the powers exercisable by CMM/DM under Section 14 of the

SARFAESI Act are ministerial steps.

36. Thus, the Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur is directed to dispose

of the applications pending before him within 60 days from today. Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad is directed to dispose of the applications pending

before him within 30 days from today. Other Judicial Magistrates where the

applications are pending, whose numbers are in single digit, are directed to

dispose of those applications within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order. The Principal District Judge, Jamshedpur and Principal District

Judge, Dhanbad are directed to monitor this disposal and send a report of

compliance within ninety days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

2026:JHHC:20889

-: 22 :-

37. Since time is an essence of this provision and spirit of this

enactment, for the purpose of speedy disposal of applications under Section

14 of the SARFAESI Act and also to maintain transparency, I direct that,

henceforth the District Magistrates/Deputy Commissioners of all the Districts

and all the Chief Judicial Magistrates of the State to maintain a separate

Register, which will reflect the date of filing of an application under Section 14

of the SARFAESI Act and the date of considering of the said applications and

the date when the same are disposed. The date of execution of the order will

also be reflected. Since the District Magistrate of each of the districts remains

overburdened with several natures of duties, they will assign a particular

officer/senior clerk in their office, who will maintain the said register by entering

the aforementioned information. They will place the register before the District

Magistrate/Deputy Commissioner once in fortnite so that the status of the

applications, which are pending before him and which need to be disposed of,

can be brought to his notice. On perusal of the register, the Deputy

Commissioner/District Magistrate will counter sign the same also. This process

will ensure quick disposal of the applications and will also ensure control over

these pending applications by the District Magistrates/Deputy Commissioners

and will bring transparency in the process.

So far as Chief Judicial Magistrates are concerned, similar register

with same entries has to be maintained by the office clerk of the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, who will ensure placing the said register for perusal before the

Chief Judicial Magistrate once in every 15 days and will also ensure that the

same is perused by the Principal District Judge / Judicial Commissioner once

in a month.

All these entries and copy of the relevant extracts of the register

can be handed over to any person, who seeks a copy of the same under the

Right to Information Act so as to maintain transparency.

38. With these observations and directions all these writ petitions

stand disposed of. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand

disposed of.

(Ananda Sen, J.)

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi

Dated 15

th

July, 2026

Kumar/Cp-02

AFR

Uploaded on 15.07.2026