GEORGE JOSE Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner is a defaulter in repayment of the loan amount to the fourth respondent bank. He had made a representation before the fourth respondent and approached this Court to a direction for consideration of his request. Through Exhibit P5 and Exhibit P5(a), this Court had directed the fourth respondent to consider the request for one time settlement scheme and dispose of the same within two months from the date of of production of the copy of the judgment. Exhibit P5 was dated 22/07/2005 and Exhibit P5(a) was a correction dated 09/12/2005.

(2.) One time settlement scheme was in force from 12/10/2001 to 31/03/2005. Therefore, the fourth respondent has disposed of the same, rejecting the prayer of the writ petitioner to accept an amount of Rs.11,024/-. Hence, the writ petitioner is again before this Court stating that the fourth respondent did not legally consider the directions of this Court for one time settlement scheme. Hence, the writ petitioner prays that further appropriate directions may be issued.

(3.) After hearing the writ petitioner and the Senior Government Pleader, I direct the writ petitioner to prefer an application afresh, before the fourth respondent, within one week from today and the fourth respondent is to consider and dispose of the representation, extending the facilities and benefits available under the one time settlement scheme, as per Circular No.27/2006, dated 29/06/2006, which is valid upto 31/12/2006. The fourth respondent shall dispose of the same, within three weeks from the date of production of the copy of the judgment.