Jagdish Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Ziladhikari Ayodhya, Distt. Ayodhya and 2 Others

Court No. - 17 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9792 of 2023 Petitioner :- Jagdish Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Ziladhikari Ayodhya, Distt. Ayodhya And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Nath Pandey,Phool Badan Singh,Rahul Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prashant Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶1Heard Shri Ram Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2.

¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset prays that he may be permitted to make District Magistrate, Ayodhya as respondent no.4.

¶3The respondents do not object to the said prayer and, accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make the District Magistrate, Ayodhya the respondent no.4 during the course of the day.

¶4It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner who is a farmer, has taken a loan through 'Kisan Credit Card' from the Regional Branch of the Bank of Baroda, Tikri, Ayodhya on 20.5.2014 for an amount of around Rs.97,000/-. For certain reasons the petitioner could not pay certain amount and, consequently, recovery proceedings were initiated against the petitioner.

¶5It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the State has promulgated a loan waiver scheme and the petitioner ought to have been granted the benefit of the said loan waiver scheme but the same was not granted and, accordingly, he has made a representation in this regard to the District Magistrate, Ayodhya on

11.9.2023.

¶6Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case opposite party no.4, i.e., District Magistrate, Ayodhya is directed to decide the representation given by the petitioner dated 11.9.2023 expeditiously.

¶7Learned Standing Counsel does not oppose the said prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶8In light of the above, opposite party No.4 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 11.9.2023 annexed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition, in accordance with law expeditiously, say within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him and communicate its decision to the petitioner as well as respondent no.3 – Bank. In case the representation is decided in favour of the petitioner, the respondent no.3 shall pass necessary order thereon within two weeks thereafter.

¶9With the aforesaid the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 mks (Alok Mathur, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench