JUDGMENT : Pankaj Mithal, C.J. 1. All the above petitions are identical in nature and arise out of the proceedings for sale/e-auction of the mortgage property, hence they have been taken up together with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the parties addressed the court on the basis of the facts narrated in writ petition W.P. (C) No. 108/2021 titled M/s. Col Nature Fabrications and another v. Punjab and Sind Bank and another. Accordingly, we treat the aforesaid petition as the leading one and considering the facts as appearing therein proceed to decide all four of them together. 3. We feel it appropriate only to narrate the facts of the aforesaid leading petition so as to adjudicate upon the points raised by either of the parties. 4. It appears that the petitioner took financial assistance from the Punjab and Sind Bank in the year 2012 and defaulted in its return as per the terms and conditions. Accordingly, the account of the petitioner was declared as non-performing-asset (NPA) on 30.06.2014 and the Bank proceeded to realize the dues from the mortgaged property which happened to be an open plot of Khasra No. 666/295 min village Kaithpur, Salmeri District Samba. 5. The petitioner was issued notice dated 14.10.2014 purported to be under Section 13 (2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) (hereinafter referred to 'the Act) requiring it to pay the dues within a period of 60 days. 6. another notice to the same effect under Section 13(2) of the Act was issued on 14.12.2014. Lastly, a notice under Section 13 (2) of the Act was issued on 03.02.2017 but the petitioner failed to discharge its liability. Thereafter, a notice for taking possession was issued under Section 13 (4) of the Act on 19.08.2017 and the possession of the mortgaged property was also taken over. 7. After all the above exercise, the Bank has now issued a sale/e-auction notice dated 05.01.2021 which has been published in the newspaper on 06.01.2021 fixing the date for the auction of the mortgaged property so as to realize the dues of the Bank. The said auction notice notifies 08 February 2021 as the date of sale and mentions the reserve price of the mortgaged property to be Rs. 2,87,00,000/-. The said auction notice notifies 08 February 2021 as the date of sale and mentions the reserve price of the mortgaged property to be Rs. 2,87,00,000/-. The footnote clearly states that it should be treated as notice under Rule 8 (6)/9(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). 8. It is pertinent to mention here that in all the four writ petitions the same sale/e-auction notice is under challenge. 9. The petitioner by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, by means of this petition has prayed for the issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the impugned e-auction/sale notice dated 05.01.2021 published in newspaper 'Indian Express' dated 06.01.2021 and that the respondents be directed not to interfere in its business. The petitioner has not claimed any other relief and has not challenged any other notice, i.e., either the one issued under Section 13(2) or 13 (4) of the Act. 10. Sh. Ajay Kumar Gandotra, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 17 of the Act and that the court cannot take over the responsibility of the Tribunal so as to adjudicate upon the validity of the sale/e-auction notice. 11. Sh. Raghu Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner, in response to the above preliminary objection submitted that the sale/e-auction notice under challenge is wholly without jurisdiction and that as it has been issued in violation of the statutory provisions, he is entitled to maintain the writ petition before the court. The alternate remedy is not an absolute bar and that Section 17 of the Act does not in any way come in his way. 12. The facts as stated above clearly demonstrate that the petitioner has simply challenged the sale/e-auction notice dated 05.01.2021 and not any notice issued under Section 13 (2) or 13 (4) of the Act. 13. Section 17 of the Act provides for a redressal Forum to the person aggrieved against any of the measures referred to in Sub-section 4 of Section 13 of the Act taken by the secured creditor. 13. Section 17 of the Act provides for a redressal Forum to the person aggrieved against any of the measures referred to in Sub-section 4 of Section 13 of the Act taken by the secured creditor. Sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act refers to the measures such as taking of possession of the secured assets of the borrower including the right of transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale for realizing the secured asset. So technically, the sale of a secured asset is one of the measures covered under sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act and as such an aggrieved person can take recourse to proceedings under Section 17 of the Act. 14. Notwithstanding the above, as in the present case, it is alleged that the sale/e-auction notice which is separate and independent to the proceedings initiated under Section 13 (4) of the Act is patently illegal as it has not been issued in conformity with the provisions of Rule 8/9 of the Rules coupled with the fact that presently there is no DRT functional, we consider it appropriate to examine the said aspect instead of relegating the petitioner before the DRT and subjecting it to a long drawn litigation which otherwise can be set at rest on the pure legal aspects by this Court itself. 15. Sh. Raghu Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that under Rule 8 (6) of the Rules, the respondents are under statutory obligation to serve upon the petitioner with 30 days notice before the sale of secured assets. No independent notice in this regard was served upon the petitioner. The notice was not even properly published as there was no publication in the vernacular language or in the newspapers having wide circulation in the locality. Even the procedure prescribed under Sub-Rule 5 of Rule 8 of the Rules was not followed vitiating the notice. 16. In order to consider the correctness of the above argument, it is important to refer to Rules 8 and 9 of the Rules which for the sake of convenience are reproduced hereinbelow: "8. Sale of immovable secured assets. Even the procedure prescribed under Sub-Rule 5 of Rule 8 of the Rules was not followed vitiating the notice. 16. In order to consider the correctness of the above argument, it is important to refer to Rules 8 and 9 of the Rules which for the sake of convenience are reproduced hereinbelow: "8. Sale of immovable secured assets. (1) Where the secured asset is an immovable property, the authorized officer shall take or cause to be taken possession, by delivering a possession notice prepared as nearly as possible in Appendix IV to these rules, to the rules, to the borrower and by affixing the possession notice on the outer door or at such conspicuous place of the property. (2) The possession notice as referred to in sub-rule (1) shall also be published, as soon as possible but in any case not later than seven days from the date of taking possession in two leading newspaper, one in vernacular language having sufficient circulation in that locality, by the authorized officer. [(2-A) All notices under these rules may also be served upon the borrower through electronic mode of service, in addition to the modes prescribed under sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2) of rule 8.] (3) In the event of possession of immovable property is actually taken by the authorized officer, such property shall be kept in his own custody or in the custody of any person authorized or appointed by him, who shall take as much care of the property in his custody as a owner of ordinary prudence would, under the similar circumstances, take of such property. (4) The authorized officer shall take steps for preservation and protection of secured assets and insure them, if necessary, till they are sold or otherwise disposed of. (5) Before effecting sale of the immovable property referred to in sub-rule (1) of rule 9, the authorized officer shall obtain valuation of the property from an approved valuer and in consultation with the secured creditor, fix the reserve price of the property and may sell the whole or any part of such immovable secured asset by any of the following methods:- (a) by obtaining quotations from the persons dealing with similar secured assets or otherwise interested in buying the such assets; or (b) by inviting tenders from the public; [(c) by holding public auction' including through e-auction mode; or] (d) by private treaty. [Provided that in case of sale of immovable property in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Transfer of Property Act, 1977 shall apply to the persons who acquires such property in the State.] (6) the authorized officer shall serve to the borrower a notice of thirty days for sale of the immovable secured assets, under sub-rule (5): [Provided that if the sale of such secured asset is being effected by either inviting tenders from the public or by holding public auction, the secured creditor shall cause a public notice in the Form given in Appendix IV-A to be published in two leading newspapers including one in vernacular language having wide circulation in the locality.] [(7) every notice of sale shall be affixed on the conspicuous part of the immovable property and the authorised officer shall upload the detailed terms and conditions of the sale, on the web-site of the secured creditor, which shall include; (a) the description of the immovable property to be sold, including the details of the encumbrances known to the secured creditor; (b) the secured debt for recovery of which the property is to be sold; (c) reserve price of the immovable secured assets below which the property may not be sold; (d) time and place of public auction or the time after which sale by any other mode shall be completed; (e) deposit of earnest money as may be stipulated by the secured creditor; (f) any other terms and conditions, which the authorized officer considers it necessary for a purchaser to know the nature and value of the property.] (8) Sale by any methods other than public auction or public tender, shall be on such terms as may be settled [between the secured creditors and the proposed purchaser in writing]. 9. Time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession, etc. 9. Time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession, etc. - [(1) No sale of immovable property under these rules, in first instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (6) of rule 8 or notice of sale has been served to the borrower: Provided further that if sale of immovable property by any one of the methods specified by sub rule (5) of rule 8 fails and sale is required to be conducted again, the authorized officer shall serve, affix and publish notice of sale of not less than fifteen days to the borrower, for any subsequent sale.] (2) The sale shall be confirmed in favour of the purchaser who has offered the highest sale price in his bid or tender or quotation or offer to the authorized officer and shall be subject to confirmation by the secured creditor: Provided that no sale under this rule shall be confirmed, if the amount offered by sale price is less than the reserve price, specified under sub-rule (5) of [rule 8]: Provided further that if the authorized officer fails to obtain a price higher than the reserve price, he may, with the consent of the borrower and the secured creditor effect the sale at such price. [(3) On every sale of immovable property, the purchaser shall immediately, i.e. on the same day or not later than next working day, as the case may be, pay a deposit of twenty five per cent of the amount of the sale price, which is inclusive of earnest money deposited, if any, to the authorized officer conducting the sale and in default of such deposit, the property shall be sold again.] (4) The balance amount of purchase price payable shall be paid by the purchaser to the authorized officer on or before the fifteenth day of confirmation of sale of the immovable property or such extended period [as may be agreed upon in writing between the purchaser and the secured creditor, in any case not exceeding three months]. (5) In default of payment within the period mentioned in sub-rule (4), the deposit shall be forfeited [to the secured creditor] and the property shall be resold and the defaulting purchaser shall forfeit all claim to the property or to any part of the sum for which it may be subsequently sold. (6) On confirmation of sale by the secured creditor and if the terms of payment have been complied with, the authorized officer exercising the power of sale shall issue a certificate of sale of the immovable property in favour of the purchaser in the Form given in Appendix V to these rules. (7) Where the immovable property sold is subject to any encumbrances, the authorized officer may, if he thinks fit, allow the purchaser to deposit with him the money required to discharge the encumbrances and any interest due thereon together with such additional amount that may be sufficient to meet the contingencies or further cost, expenses and interest as may be determined by him: [Provided that if after meeting the cost of removing encumbrances and contingencies there is any surplus available out of the money deposited by the purchaser such surplus shall be paid to the purchaser within fifteen days of finalization of the sale.] (8) On such deposit of money for discharge of the encumbrances, the authorized officer may issue or cause the purchaser to issue notices to the persons interested in or entitled to the money deposited with him and take steps to make the payment accordingly. (9) The authorized officer shall deliver the property to the purchaser free from encumbrances known to the secured creditor on deposit of money as specified in sub-rule (7) above. (10) The certificate of sale issued under sub-rule (6) shall specifically mention that whether the purchaser has purchased the immovable secured asset free from any encumbrances known to the secured creditor or not." 17. A glance at the various sub-rules of Rule 8 of the Rules would reveal that Sub-rules 1 to 4 of Rule 8 of the Rules are in respect of notice for taking possession of the secured asset and are not relevant for our purposes. It is only Sub-rules 5, 6 and 7 of Rule 8 of the Rules read with Rule 9 (1) of the Rules with which we are more concerned. 18. It is only Sub-rules 5, 6 and 7 of Rule 8 of the Rules read with Rule 9 (1) of the Rules with which we are more concerned. 18. Sub-Rule 5 of Rule 8 of the Rules provides that before any sale of any secured asset is effected under Rule 9 of the Rules, a valuation report of the property from an approved valuer has to be obtained and a reserve price is to be fixed before obtaining quotations , inviting tenders or holding public auction. 19. The respondents in the counter-affidavit have clearly stated that before issuing notice for sale/e-auction, reports from two approved valuers were obtained. The valuers vide their reports dated 24.11.2020 and 02.12.2020 have worked out the minimum value of the property to be Rs. 1224.00 lakhs and Rs. 1166.40 lakhs respectively. Accordingly, after fixing the reserved price @ Rs. 8.00 lakhs per kanal as per the circle rate, auction notice was issued and published. 20. In view of the above procedure followed by the respondents, it cannot be said that there is any violation of Sub-rule 5 of Rule 8 of the Rules in proceeding with the sale/e-auction of the property. 21. Rule 9(1) of the Rules provides that no sale of any secured asset/immovable property shall take place before the expiry of 30 days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in the newspapers as referred to in proviso to Sub-rule 6 of Rule 8 of the Rules or the notice of sale has been served upon the borrower. This means that sale of property can only take place after the publication of the sale/e-auction notice in the newspapers as contemplated under Sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 of the Rules. Therefore, both the Rules have to be read together. Sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 of the Rules simply provides that the notice of 30 days for sale shall be served upon the borrower. Sub-rule (7) of Rule 8 of the Rules further provides that such notice of sale shall be affixed on the conspicuous part of the immovable property. 22. In view of the aforesaid legal provisions, it is amply clear that the sale of secured asset can only be effectuated after publishing a notice of 30 days. Sub-rule (7) of Rule 8 of the Rules further provides that such notice of sale shall be affixed on the conspicuous part of the immovable property. 22. In view of the aforesaid legal provisions, it is amply clear that the sale of secured asset can only be effectuated after publishing a notice of 30 days. The sale/e-auction notice has been issued on 05.01.2021 and has been published in not only two newspapers of English but in four daily newspapers of which two happened to be in Hindi. The notice was published in the newspapers, i.e., 'Indian Express' Financial Express' 'Dainik Swera' and Punjab Kesri' all dated 06.01.2021. 23. A bare perusal of the above notice reveals that a clear 30 days notice has been given to the petitioner before effecting the sale of the secured asset. 24. In this view of the matter, sufficient public notice of the sale/e-auction was given not only to the petitioner but to all concerned. 25. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is entitled to two notices of 30 days each before effectuating the sale, is bereft of merit. The said aspect of the matter is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Canara Bank v. M. Amarender Reddy and another, AIR 2017 SC 1441 : ( AIR 2017 SC 1441 ), wherein it has been clearly laid down that notice to borrower and public notice of sale of secured asset can be issued simultaneously and the only requirement of law upon plain reading of Rules 8 (6) and 9 (1) of the Rules is that auction/sale of the secured asset requires 30 days notice of intention of the sale to the borrower. 26. The Apex Court in deciding the above case, held that it is permissible to simultaneously issue notice to the borrower about the intention to sell and also to issue a public notice for the sale of secured immovable property. The only restriction is that there should be 30 days time gap between such notice and the date of sale. It further held that there is no need or requirement to give separate individual notice. 27. The only restriction is that there should be 30 days time gap between such notice and the date of sale. It further held that there is no need or requirement to give separate individual notice. 27. The notice in dispute clearly states that it is a notice under Rule 8 (6) read with Rule 9 (1) of the Rules, meaning thereby that it is a composite notice of 30 days which is in consonance with law. 28. Thus the argument that the petitioner is entitled to 30 days notice of intended sale and another 30 days notice before the sale of the property on the basis of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Mathew Varghese v. M Amritha Kumar : (2014) 5 SCC 610 : ( AIR 2015 SC 50 ) stands answered by the decision in the Canara Bank (Supra) and is misconceived. 29. After having dealt with the above two authorities, we do not deem it necessary to discuss one or two other precedents referred to by the parties. 30. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the discussion hereinabove, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where we should proceed to exercise our extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction in the matter. 31. Accordingly, all the petitions are dismissed with no order as to costs.