JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition was heard and is being disposed off finally. 3. Petitioner has challenged the notice dated 9th March, 2011 (Annex.2) under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as an "Act"), possession notice under Section 13(4) of the Act dated 3rd June, 2011 issued by respondent Bank, to quash the same, qua petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 17 of the Act to file an appeal before Debt Recovery Tribunal against the impugned notice issued under Section 13(4) of the Act. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that so far as notice under Section 13(4) is concerned, he can prefer an appeal under Section 17 of the Act, but he cannot challenge the order rejecting the representation of the petitioner filed under sub-section (3A) of Section 13 of the Act against notice under section 13(2) of the Act, in view of "proviso" to sub-section (3A) of the Act, therefore, he has preferred this writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the rider put by 'proviso' to sub-section (3A) of Section 13 is only for not challenging the order rejecting representation independently by way of an appeal, but the said order can definitely be challenged in an appeal preferred against notice under Section 13(4) of the Act. He further submitted that liberty may be granted to petitioner to challenge the said order while preferring appeal against notice under Section 13(4) of the Act. He further submitted that he will not raise any objection in this regard, if appeal is preferred by petitioner before Tribunal. 7. In view of submission of the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that writ petition may be disposed off with liberty to petitioner to challenge order of respondent Bank rejecting the representation/objection of the petitioner filed under Section 13(3A) of the Act along with appeal under Section 17 of the Act against the impugned notice dated 3rd June, 2011 under Section 13(4) of the Act. 8. Prayer of petitioner is reasonable and the same is allowed. The writ petition is disposed off with liberty to petitioner, as prayed for. 8. Prayer of petitioner is reasonable and the same is allowed. The writ petition is disposed off with liberty to petitioner, as prayed for. It is further made clear that petitioner will be entitled to raise other submissions also before Debt Recovery Tribunal, in accordance with law.Petition allowed. *******