JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. A. L. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has averred diverse grounds of objection including one that for obtaining loan to the extent of Rs.1,00,0000/- under “Cent Sahayog” Scheme, no co-lateral security and guarantee required and according to the petitioner, the loan under reference is one under that scheme. 3. Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner however has submitted on the several aspects directly or indirectly related the controversy with one that the respondents-bank did not consider the reply dated 09.09.2016 [Annexure-3 to the writ petition] filed by the petitioner in response of the bank’s notice dated 18.08.2016 [Annexure-2 to the writ petition] and as such bank has failed to communicate the considered opinion of the bank in respect of the objections raised in this petition. 4. Mr. A.L. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that the said notice was an ordinary notice for persuading the petitioner to pay of the outstanding against the over-draft facility to the extent of Rs.64,00,000.00/- as issued on 12.09.2014. The outstanding was to the extent of Rs.65,44,058.97/- as on 01.09.2016. Therefore, the bank did not have any statutory obligation make such communication. 5. The respondent-bank on discarding the objection as raised issued the statutory notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 asking the petitioner to pay the outstanding within 60(sixty) days. In reply to that notice, the petitioner did not raise any objection whatsoever. The reply dated 26.10.2016 [Annexure-5 to the writ petition] as submitted by the petitioner reads as under: “To The Chief Manager Central Bank of India, Agartala Branch Agartala, West Tripura-799001 Sub: Your Legal Notice issued by Ld. Advocate Mr. Amrit Lal Saha dated 18/08/2016 received on 26/08/2016 and your notice under Sec 13(2) dated 01/09/2016. Ref.: Cent-Sahayog Over Draft Account No.: 1991902843 Respected Sir, This is to inform you that the captioned notices issued from your advocate and subsequently by Authorised officer of bank are contradicting each other. Thus, rendered not good. So sir, I raise objection on your notice of 12(2) issued from your end on 01/09/2016 under SARFAESI Act, 2002 as is not tenable. Thus, rendered not good. So sir, I raise objection on your notice of 12(2) issued from your end on 01/09/2016 under SARFAESI Act, 2002 as is not tenable. This is for your kind information and consideration please. Your co-operation is highly solicited. Thanking you. Yours Sincerely For M/s. Exeon Multimedia Sd/- illegible (Mr. Banti Ghosh) Proprietor” 6. Even the bank had responded to that said objection/reply dated 26.10.2016 [Annexure-5 to the writ petition] by the communication dated 02.11.2016 [Annexure-6 to the writ petition]. Therefore there is no irregularity in the procedure as sought to be contended by Mr. Biswas, learned counsel. 7. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in response to such submission made by Mr. A. L. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that the petitioner has failed to make the substantive reply to the notice as issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. 8. This court having due regard to the construct of the reasonable opportunity as enunciated in Mardia Chemicals LTD. And Others vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2004) 4 SCC 311 , is of the view that the petitioner may be allowed to submit a substantive reply to notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. But such reply shall be filed by the petitioner within 15(fifteen) days from the day when the petitioner shall receive a copy of this order. The Bank Authority shall communicate their considered opinion and decision in terms of Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act to the petitioner. Before that no action shall be taken on the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. 9. With this observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. The interim order as passed earlier stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. A copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel appearing for the parties.