NALIN VASUDEV SOMPURA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Ms. Neeta Pandit, the learned advocate appearing for Mr. A.R. Gupta for the petitioner; Mr. H.K. Patel, the learned APP appearing for the respondent­District Magistrate and Mr. Anip Gandhi, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.2­State Bank of India.

(2.) By this writ­application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner ­ a Guarantor has prayed for the following reliefs:­ "32(A)YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 05/11/2014 at Annexure­H to this petition passed by the respondent No.1 in the interest of justice.

(3.) It appears from the materials on record that the petitioner had stood as a Guarantor of the Principal Borrower, who availed of the loan facility from the State Bank of India. It also appears that the petitioner in his capacity as a Guarantor mortgaged his property being a parcel of the land bearing Survey No.66 situated in Sandesarapati, Sim Taluka Patan, admeasuring about 17956 sq.mtrs.