RAKESH KUMAR Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri D. K. Rastogi, holding brief of Sri N. K. Seth learned counsel for the opposite parties as well as learned standing counsel.

(2.) Sri D. K. Rastogi holding brief of Shri N. K. Seth, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank at the time of commencement of hearing submitted that in case entire dues is paid to the respondent-bank in easy instalments he has got no objection and ready to accept the same. Affidavits have been exchanged. Hence, with the consent of parties, I have proceeded to decide the writ petition at admission stage.

(3.) Petitioner Nos. 1, 3 and 4 and father of the petitioner No. 2 had taken agricultural loan for the purchase of a tractor from opposite party No. 3. On account of default of payment of dues, the respondent-bank had sent a reference to recover the amount as arrears of land revenue. It was submitted by the petitioners' counsel that the petitioners had approached the respondent-bank to provide statement of account, as earlier it was Raj Mani father of petitioner No. 2 having knowledge relating to the loan in question but the opposite party No. 3 had not provided the necessary details, instead referred the matter to the revenue authorities to recover the amount in question as arrears of land revenue. Certificate of recovery sent under Section 11A of Agricultural Credit Act, 1973, has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. During the course of argument it was submitted by the petitioners' counsel that, the Tahsildar, Tahsil Colonelganj, district Gonda, without serving the copy of the citation of recovery had proceeded ahead with the attachment and sale of the petitioners' property in pursuance to agricultural loan taken from the respondent-bank.