- (1.) IT is the case of the writ petitioners that a proceeding under the Securitization and Construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 was started against them before the learned District Magistrate, Burdwan for recovery of secured assets on the allegation of failure to pay back the loan amount.
(2.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that in response to the notice they participated in the hearing. However, the outcome of that proceeding was never communicated to them. He then contended that this non -communication of final decision of a statutory authority amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.
(3.) ON the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank submitted that already the concerned authority passed an order whereby after recovery of the mortgaged property, the possession thereof has been given to the bank and the bank has held an auction and in the auction the successful bidder has also deposited the earnest money. The learned advocate of the State vehemently disputed the contention of the learned counsel of the petitioners that the order has not been communicated. He submitted that already the petitioners applied for the certified copy of the order and as soon as he applied within a very reasonable period, same has been supplied to him. Therefore, it cannot now be claimed that the order was not communicated to them. He contended that the whole object of communication is to inform the persons about the decision in the matter.;