INDRADEO Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI D.N.Singh is present on behalf of the Bank. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier seeking benefit of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 being Writ Petition No. 6345 of 2009. The writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 09.02.2009 permitting the petitioner to make an application for the purpose under the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008, before the Branch Manager of the Bank concerned and the Branch Manager in turn was required to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with the Scheme of 2008, within the time specified. The Branch Manager under the order dated 20.03.2009 has rejected the application made by the petitioner after recording a finding that under the Schme of 2008, benefit of debt waiver has been granted only in respect of loans which were sanctioned prior to 31.03.2007 and had been distributed upto 31.03.2007 with further condition that the loan became over due on 31.12.2007 and in fact payment had not been made up to 29.02.2008. It has been recorded that the loan account of the petitioner shall become over due, he is not entitled to the benefit of the Scheme of 2008. The finding recorded is being questioned before this Court. With reference to the provision of Scheme it is contended that the loan account of the petitioner shall become overdue after a short period and, therefore, the benefits of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 should also be granted in his favour. I am of the considered opinion that since the petitioner is not covered by the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 as has rightly been held by the Branch Manager, there is little or no justification to grant any relief to the writ petitioner specially in absence of his case being covered under the provisions of the Scheme of 2008. At this stage counsel for the petitioner came up with the plea that he is ready and will to pay the outstanding dues provided he is granted some reasonable time for deposit of money. Counsel for the respondent Bank agrees to deposit of the money in installments to be fixed by this Court. In view of the aforesaid, it is provided as follows : (a) The petitioner shall deposit one fourth of the total amount demanded on or before 31st July, 2009. (b) Within one week of the said deposit of money, petitioner shall make a representation before the Bank furnishing the statement of account including the money due up to date. (c) The Branch Manager shall furnish a complete statement of account within two weeks, thereafter. (d) Petitioner shall deposit the balance outstanding amount shown in the statement of account in three equal installments of three months each, commencing from 30th October, 2009. (e) Recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall remain in abeyance up to 30th July, 2009 at the first instance and in case payments are made, as indicated above, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance to the said recovery certificate. In case of default in compliance of any of the conditions mentioned above, the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefits of this order and it shall be open to the respondent bank to recover the balance amount in accordance with law. If the deposits are made in terms of this order by the petitioner, he shall not be liable to pay any recovery charges. Writ petition is disposed of.