Uttarakhand High Court
Harish Chandra vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 11 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1555 of 2021
Harish Chandra .......Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand & others .....Respondents
Mr. Sunder Singh Dhauni, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, Additional CSC, for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent Nos.1 and
2.
Mr. M.S. Rawat, Advocate, for the respondent No.3.
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J (Oral)
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the
following reliefs:-
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature
certiorari quashing the impugned recovery citation
no.295371 dated - 26.04.2021 (Annexure No.2 to
this writ petition) issued by the respondent No.2
i.e. Tehsildar, Bageshwar, District Bageshwar.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding/directing respondent
nos.2 & 3 not to recover the amount of loan in lieu
of impugned recovery citation no.295371 dated
26.04.2021 and not to take any coercive measure
against the petitioner.
III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding/directing respondent
nos.3 to fix the easy installment of the loan amount
waiving the recovery charges.
III. Issue any suitable writ, order or direction of
any nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the present circumstances of the
case."
2. In a nutshell, the challenge given by the petitioner is to
the recovery proceedings, which has been resorted to by the
respondent bank for the purposes of recovering an amount of
Rs.4,86,945/-, which was a financial assistance, which was extended
to the petitioner by way of a cash credit limit.
3. Initially, the amount fell due on account of the
commission of the default, and non remittance of the amount, the
recovery citation was issued way back on 01.02.2017. The said
recovery citation dated 01.02.2017, was challenged by the petitioner
by preferring a writ petition being WPMS No.326 of 2017,
"Harish Chandra Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others", wherein,
the Coordinate Bench of this Court by the judgment of 18.04.2017,
had permitted the petitioner to deposit the amount sought to be
recovered in pursuance to the Recovery Citation dated 01.02.2017,
and was made payable in easy installments, as directed therein.
4. Admittedly, the said amount has not been deposited by
the petitioner till date, on account of the recurring default committed
by the petitioner, the respondent Bank had no other options, except to
have resorted to the recovery proceedings, and as a consequence
thereto, the Recovery Citation being Citation No.295371, dated
26.04.2021, has been issued for the recovery of the amount, as already
detailed above.
5. The writ courts which are the courts of equitable
jurisdiction, can only extend a solace to the litigants, who approaches
the Court with his bonafides by expressing his inability to deposit the
amount, and that too fixation of the amount of the installments, which
is otherwise governed by the terms of the loan, the High Court can
venture over it for fixing installments only, subject to the condition
that the respondent Bank gives a consent for fixation of the
installments. Availing that opportunity, the petitioner has already filed
an earlier writ petition being WPMS No.326 of 2017, "Harish
Chandra Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others", which was disposed
of by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated
18.04.2017, and for the last more than four years, the petitioner has
not complied with the directions given in the judgment of 18.04.2017.
Hence this writ petition will amount to be a second writ petition for
the same cause of action, which is not maintainable. Hence, the writ
petition stands dismissed.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
11.08.2021
NR/
