NARENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohan Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 Jeewan Beema Karmchari Sahkari Sangh Samiti Limited, Varanasi(hereinafter referred to as 'Samiti') and Sri Somil Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

(2.) The controversy in both the writ petitions is that the petitioners are guarantors of one loan taken by respondent no. 4 from respondent no. 3 Samiti and the prayer is that respondent no. 3(Samiti) may not recover outstanding amount of dues of loan towards respondent no. 4 from the petitioners. In view of the same, the two petitions were heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.

(3.) The case of the petitioners in the writ petitions is that the respondent no. 4 had taken loan on 1.6.2004 for an amount of Rs.4,11,000/- for the marriage of his daughter. Petitioners are working as Development Officers in LIC, Branch Chunar alongwith the respondent No. 4. The respondent no. 4 was dismissed from service by the respondent no. 2 i.e. LIC, Branch Chunar and thereafter petitioners who are guarantors of the loan were served with two separate notices dated 22.5.2010 asking them to arrange for immediate clearance of dues of the borrower failing which the outstanding amount would be deducted from their salary as per irrevocable guarantee agreed and signed by them. The petitioners submit that they approached the respondent authorities and filed reply/representations stating therein that the borrower, namely respondent no. 4 is having landed property including vehicle and moreover the outstanding amount should be recovered from GPF, Gratuity and other arrears payable to him lying in the department i.e. respondent no. 2. The demand notice sent to the petitioners-guarantors without adjusting the outstanding amount from the GPF, gratuity etc. is illegal and arbitrary. The respondent no. 3 could not have proceeded against the petitioners without realizing the outstanding amount of loan from the dues of respondent no. 4 lying with the respondent no. 2.