(1.) THE petitioner, Sayeed Jafar Imam, son of Jahid Husain, Resident of Village Sasundi Tehsil, and District Ghazipur, admits having taken a loan from the Union Bank of India in 1986 for Rs. 25,000-00 and, further, admits that the entire loan had not been discharged barring certain payments, the receipt of which the petitioner has appended as Annexure-I to the writ petition. THE contention of the petitioner is that the realisation of the amount as a public debt is irregular and, further, he is entitled to the benefit of a rebate under the Debt Exemption Scheme, 1990 (rin rahat yojana, 1990) and, thus, the recovery proceedings ought to be quashed with a further direction that the petitioner be given the requisite rebate as was promised by the U. P. Government.
(2.) WITH an admitted debt against a loan, the Court is not impressed with the submission that the amount should not be realised from the petitioner, more so, when it is long outstanding. On the second submission, the Court finds, upon a perusal of the Scheme, aforesaid, appended to the petition, that the rebate cannot be had for the asking. WITHout going into the merits, whether this Scheme is available to the petitioner or not, on a perusal of the Scheme, the Court notices that under clause 6, any debtor intending to claim a benefit under the Scheme must pay his debt in time and discharge the loan, except the amount on which he seeks rebate. Only, then he may contend that the concession of rebate be considered by the Government. The Scheme is not available to defaulters. It is only for those who pay their debts in accordance with the agreement. When the balance represents the amount on which the rebate is to be granted only then the appropriate authority may consider whether the debtor is entitled to a rebate as under the Scheme, depending upon nature of the debt and the purpose of the loan.
(3.) AT the time when this order was passed, learned counsel for the Union Bank of India, Mr. S. Mohan, Advocate, was present.