MAHESH CHAND AGARWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the recovery citation dated 14-8-2008 and recovery certificate dated 3-7-2006 basically on two grounds, i.e. the respondents be directed to reach the One Time Settlement with the petitioner and the respondents should not be permitted to make the recovery by issuing citation as arrears of land revenue once they have chosen to issue notice under Section 13(2) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter called the 'Act 2002').

(2.) We have heard Shri K. S. Bajpai holding brief of Shri Krishan Shukla learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Ashok Bhatnagar for the Bank; Shri Tej Prakash for respondent No. 1 and the learned Standing Counsel Shri C. K. Rai for respondent No. 3. So far as the issue of issuing direction to settle the matter by reaching One Time Settlement is concerned cannot be accepted for the reason that no statutory provision has been brought to our notice wherein the respondent Bank is under a legal obligation to reach such a settlement.

(3.) The issue involved herein has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in M. M. Accessories & Ann v. U. P. Financial Corporation & Anr., (2002) 1 AWC 242 : (2002 All LJ 967), wherein the Court held that no direction can be issued to a party under the Statute where the duty is discretionary and authority, upon whom the duty vests, has exercised its discretion reasonably and within its jurisdiction. While deciding the said case, reliance has been placed on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Bihar Eastern Gangetic Fisherman Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Sipahi Singh & Ors., AIR 1977 SC 2149; Lekhraj Satramdas Lalvant v. Deputy Custodian-cum-Managing Officer, AIR 1966 SC 334: Dr. Rai Shivendra Bahadur v. The Governing Body of the Nalanda College, AIR 1962 SC 1210; and Dr. Umakant Saran v. State of Bihar, AIR 1973 SC 964.