AJAY SYAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No. 2, to investigate the affairs of respondent No. 3 with particular reference to the accounts of respondent No. 4. It has further been prayed that if upon investigation, any act of fraud committed by respondent No. 3 stands established, action be taken as per provisions of Banking Regulation Act, 1949.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that before filing of this writ petition, the petitioner has not approached respondent No. 2. To claim writ of mandamus, it is necessary for any person to first approach the authority concerned and only thereafter, he may approach this Court, if no action has been taken. So far as proceedings under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 are concerned, against action taken, appeal is competent. As per information supplied, the appeal was, in fact, filed by the Company- respondent No. 4, the same was dismissed in default and application, to recall that order is still pending. No case is made out for interference.

(3.) Dismissed.