Tahsildar Must Take Consequential Action on Section 14 Orders Within 60 Days, Absent a Stay or Hindrance.

After declaring the borrower’s account a Non-Performing Asset, the Bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”), including issuing a notice under Section 13(2) and a possession notice

The District Magistrate passed an order under Section 14 on 24 July 2026 in the Bank’s favour, but the Bank alleged that the Tahsildar had not taken consequential steps to deliver possession despite its representations

The Bank filed a writ petition seeking, among other reliefs, a direction to decide its representations

The State did not oppose a time-bound direction to the Tahsildar

Whether the Court should direct the Tahsildar to consider and decide the Bank’s pending proceedings or representations and take consequential steps following the District Magistrate’s order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act

The Court considered Sections 13(2) and 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, under which a secured creditor may initiate enforcement measures and seek the District Magistrate’s assistance in obtaining possession of secured assets

It did not cite or apply any judicial precedent, nor did it formulate a broader rule on the merits of the Bank’s entitlement to possession

The Court noted that the Bank had obtained a Section 14 order but alleged that no consequential action had followed despite its representations to the Tahsildar

In light of the State’s position that the matter should be processed by the revenue authorities in accordance with law, the Court considered a time-bound direction appropriate

It left the merits to the competent authority and made the direction subject to there being no hindrance or stay by a higher authority or competent court

It expressed no opinion on the merits