Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24357 of 2018 Petitioner :- Amar Saxena Respondent :- U P Khadi Exam Gramodyog Board And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Namit Srivastava,Parul Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Deo Pandey
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Heard Sri Namit Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents and Sri Bhanu Deo Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the U.P.Khadi Evam Gramodyog Board-respondent no.1.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner, who is the Secretary of the Maa Vishno Gramodyog Seva Sansthan applied for loan from the U.P.Khadi Evam Gramodyog Board, Lucknow. The loan amount was of Rs. 23,80,000/- with interest at the rate of 17% per annum payable on an amount of Rs. 19,92,000/- while the balance of Rs. 3,88,000/- was to be as interest free loan, which was to be converted into the grant after the recovery of the last instalment of loan with interest. The society defaulted in payment of loan amount and, therefore, recovery proceedings have been initiated, which led to filing of a writ petition being Writ Petition No.41476 of 2001 and this Court while granting interim order on 19.12.2001 stayed the recovery of loan from the petitioner but kept it open for the respondents to recover the loan amount from the society.
The petitioner is a society, which runs a rice mill. It appears that no recovery was made from the assets of the society and finally the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed on 21.4.2016 holding that there is no infirmity in recovery proceedings initiated by the Board. It also appears that the Society thereafter went to Supreme Court by filing Special Leave to Appeal No. 23561 of 2016 in which notices were issued subject to the petitioner depositing Rs. 10,00,000/-(Rs. Ten lacs) before the Registry of the Court. The petitioner admittedly again defaulted and did not deposit any amount and now the recovery is being pressed against the petitioner, which is under challenge.
It is to be noted that the writ petition being Writ C No. 41476 of 2001 having been dismissed and the society did not comply the order of the Supreme Court in SLP, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage as the petitioner is admittedly defaulted in payment of loan amount and the petitioner being Member as well as Secretary of the Society is liable to pay the loan amount.
There is no infirmity in the order of recovery.
The writ petition is mis-conceived and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 SKM
(Shashi Kant,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)