Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Between vs The Govt Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 8 August, 2024
APHC010602282014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3330]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 29196/2014
Between:
D.Habeebulla, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Govt Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. L V S NAGARAJU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COOPERATION (AP)
2. K SITA RAM
The Court made the following order:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking the following relief:
"...to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one
in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of
the respondents in proposing to auction the mortgaged
property on 08-10-2014 vide E.P.No.284/2004-05 issued
under notice of sale to the decree holder and defaulter
dated 18-08-2014 without extending the benefit of One Time
Settlement Scheme to clear the dues pending with the
respondent bank as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article
14 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to orders
passed by the Hon'ble High Court in W.A.No.1227 of 2002
and batch dated 20-08-2009 and consequently direct the
respondents to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to
settle the dues pending with the bank by way of one time
settlement by waiving the interest as was done in similarly
situated defaulters and to pass such other order or orders..."
2. The resentment of the petitioner herein is that petitioner has
obtained an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards loan vide M.T.L.No.76/107
from the 4th respondent-bank in the year 1995 for Agriculture purpose.
Due to several reasons, the petitioner was not able to repay the said
loan amount. The petitioner made a representation to all the
respondents to extend or revival the benefit of O.T.S. Scheme, as
provided by the bank earlier for one time settlement vide letter dated
28.07.2006 and requested them to calculate the interest at the rate of
12% simple interest. The petitioner made a representation in pursuance
of the letter dated 28.07.2006 to avail O.T.S. Scheme. Several times
the petitioner has approached the respondents to settle the issue with
the respondents but the respondents have not extended the O.T.S.
Scheme to the petitioner. However, the said scheme was extended to
some other members and staff.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this
Court in similar circumstances disposed of W.A.No.1227 of 2002 and
batch granted liberty to the appellants in the writ appeal to submit the
appropriate applications to the respondent-bank for extension of benefit
under O.T.S. Scheme and on receipt thereof, the respondent-bank
were directed to consider the same, in accordance with law as per the
guidelines.
4. The respondents have also issued notices in E.P.No.284/2004-
05 proposing to auction the property on 08.10.2014 wherein, the
principal amount was shown as Rs.10,000/- and with interest it was
shown as Rs.1,12,686/- plus further interest at 21% from 01.08.2014
plus costs.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied on Bariki Babu
v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh 1, the judgment is not
applicable to the present facts of the case. The learned counsel further
requested to direct the respondents to settle the disputes amicable
between the petitioner and the respondents.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has availed
W.P.No.7121 of 2007 dated 31.03.2008
loan of meager amount i.e., Rs.10,000/- and this Court granted interim
direction on 25.09.2014 directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the
amount mentioned in the auction notice dated 18.08.2014, within a
period of four (04) weeks. As directed by this Court, the petitioner
deposited the amount this shows the bonafides of the petitioner.
7. Even though the matter was listed thrice i.e., on 23.07.2024,
02.08.2024 and 08.08.2024, there is no representation on behalf of the
contesting respondents. Hence, this Court is inclined to dispose of the
writ petition in the absence of the contesting respondents.
8. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to make a representation for
O.T.S. Scheme to the respondent-bank, within a period of two (02)
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and on receiving
of application for O.T.S., the respondent-bank is hereby instructed to
consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically and take appropriate
decision, even for waiving of interest, within a period of four (04) weeks
thereform.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO
Date: 08.08.2024
KBN
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.29196 of 2014
Date: 08.08.2024
KBN
