Judgment :- S. Tamilvanan, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Standing Counsel for the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ambasamudram Branch, Tirunelveli District, the 4th respondent herein. 2. The scope of the writ petition is limited. The petitioner has sought for an order in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the 4th respondent to permit the petitioner to take his household articles, his personal certificates, other documents and personal belongings of the petitioner and his family members from the locked and sealed mortgaged properties, situated in Door No.15, North Street, Chettimedu Village, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District and in Door Nos.91.92 and 94, Main Road, Chettimedu Village, Ambasamudram Taluk, Tirunelveli District. 3. It is an admitted fact that the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, has passed an order in S.A.No.97 of 2014. The petitioner himself is debtor and the 4th respondent – State Bank of India is the secured creditor. Since the amount due and payable to the 4th respondent Bank was not settled, action was taken under SARFAESI Act and possession was also taken over under the Act, by the State Bank of India, Ambasamudram Branch. It cannot be disputed that the writ petition challenging the order of taking over possession by the 4th respondent under SARFAESI Act would not be maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution and if there is any grievance, the remedy would be before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. However, to meet the ends of justice, so as to enable the petitioner take his belongs which are not covered as per the order passed under the SARFAESI Act, this Court ordered notice to the learned Standing Counsel for the State Bank of India. 4. Mr. S.Sethuraman, learned Standing Counsel for the State Bank of India, appearing for the 4th respondent, by using his good office, advised the 4th respondent to permit the petitioner to take over all his movables that were available in the premises. Accordingly, an order was passed by this Court on 22.01.2015. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody in connection with some criminal case. On the aforesaid circumstances, it would not be proper to keep the writ petition pending till the release of the petitioner. Accordingly, an order was passed by this Court on 22.01.2015. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody in connection with some criminal case. On the aforesaid circumstances, it would not be proper to keep the writ petition pending till the release of the petitioner. On instructions, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submitted that the 4th respondent has no objection for the petitioner taking his belongings, if any, available in the building. We do hereby record the service rendered by Mr. S.Sethuraman, learned standing counsel appearing for the 4th respondent, to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, it is open to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to approach the learned counsel for the 4th respondent to get out of the movables belong to the petitioner, available at the aforesaid premises, not covered under the SARFAESI Proceedings, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.