Mohd. Hafij vs State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 1452 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 3661 of 2014
 

 
Petitioner :- Mohd. Hafij
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Finance Deptt. & Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Prakash Srivastava,Rajesh Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vinay Shanker
 

 
Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J.

Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.

We have heard Shri Vijay Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents. Shri Vinay Shanker appears for the respondent-bank.

By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no.3 to restrain to recover to the amount Rs.7500/- with interest against the petitioner.

ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no.3 to adjust  the demand amount with interest in loan account and no dues certificate and original documents given to the petitioner."

It is alleged that the petitioner was given a loan of Rs.1 lac with an arrangement of subsidy of Rs.7500/- under Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna 2002-03 by the Allahabad Bank for carrying business of sale of building materials. The petitioner has nowhere given the date nor annexed the receipts by which he has paid the instalments of the borrowed amount.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-bank informs that the loan was declared as non-performing asset in the year 2012.

The writ petition, without giving details about the disbursement and repayment of instalments, only for the purpose of claiming subsidy, which is linked with the due performance of the agreement and payment of instalments, is wholly misconceived and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 2.5.2014

RKP