Alternative statutory remedy under SARFAESI bars writ challenge to post-13(4) auction measures in recovery proceedings.

A writ challenge to a SARFAESI auction notice issued after measures under Section 13(4) was treated as not maintainable because an effective statutory appeal lay before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17. The Court applied the settled rule that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where the statute provides an adequate alternative remedy, particularly in bank recovery proceedings. It also noted that the petition was filed at the eleventh hour and that no special exception was made for the petitioner's status as an educational institution. The petition was dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the SARFAESI auction notice was maintainable in view of the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under the Act.

Analysis: The challenge was directed against the auction process initiated after issuance of notice under Section 13(2) and measures under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The Court noted that the matter had reached a post-13(4) stage and that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17. Relying on the settled rule that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not to be exercised when an effective statutory remedy exists, especially in recovery matters involving banks and financial institutions, the Court declined to entertain the petition. The Court also found that the petitioner had approached at the eleventh hour and that no special treatment was warranted on the ground that it was an educational institution.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed, leaving the petitioner free to avail the remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act is available against measures taken under Section 13(4), the High Court should ordinarily decline writ jurisdiction and insist on exhaustion of that remedy.

---