ANNASAHEB CHOUGHLE URBAN Vs. PRAKASH RAJARAM PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed to issue direction to the Committee on Petitions, constituted under the Maharashtra Legislative Council Rules, to refrain from entertaining the application dated 24 th July, 2010, submitted by Respondent No. 17, along with undated representation of Respondent Nos. 1 to 16 Exhibit 'B' collectively. The alternative relief claimed is to issue direction or Writ of Mandamus to direct Respondent No. 18 to place the representation of the Petitioner Bank, dated 24 th October, 2011 Exhibit 'I', before the abovesaid Committee with further direction that the same be heard and disposed of in a time bound manner.

(2.) Briefly stated, the Petitioner Bank had advanced an aggregate amount of Rs. 90 lacs to 20 borrowers on 29 th March, 2004. The Bank advanced another some of Rs. 9 lacs to three other borrowers on 30 th March, 2007. That advance was given against the security of mortgage created by each of the 23 persons in the Bank's favour. In due course, however, the loan amount became hopelessly irregular and non performing assets. As a result, the Bank processed the proposal of the said 23 borrowers and found that 16 borrowers were small/marginal farmers as defined in the loan waiver scheme floated by the Government. As on 31 st December, 2007, these 16 persons were collectively eligible for loan waiver of Rs.30,33,489. The Bank, accordingly, gave credit of the corresponding amount in the respective accounts of the said 16 persons. After the said adjustment, as on 31 st March, 2010, the sum of Rs. 28,52,927/ still remained due and payable by them to the Petitioner Bank collectively. So far as the seven remaining persons, who were not small farmers, they were eligible for a partial waiver of 25% of the outstanding amount in their accounts as on 31 st December, 2007. However, the said seven persons failed to deposit the necessary amount in order to become entitled for loan waiver. The amount due and payable by the said seven borrowers, as on 31 st March, 2010, is stated to be 1,17,35,606/.

(3.) Since the abovesaid payment became over due, the Petitioner Bank had no option but to initiate proceedings under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The Registrar of the Co operative Societies, Maharashtra State, Pune, who is the Statutory Authority to issue Recovery Certificates, after hearing the Petitioner Bank and the 23 defaulters, vide order dated 3 rd June, 2008, issued separate Recovery Certificates under Section 101 of the Act. On the basis of the said Recovery Certificates, the Petitioner Bank resorted to execution of Recovery Certificates, under Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules").