The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records in respect of the order passed by the second respondent dated 27.05.2016 in Na.Ka.No:1209/2016 A2 and quash the same, consequently direct the third respondent to waive the loan and return the jewels, which were pledged by the petitioner in respect of loan No:10114 (agriculture) dated 09.03.2006.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner took lease of the land bearing Survey No.111/2, 111/3, 112/2 with an extent of 4 acres from one Kiliammal and had applied for agricultural loan by submitting chitta and adangal issued by the Village Administrative Officer before the third respondent office on 09.03.2006. He had also pledged his jewels weighing about 110 grams and obtained Rs.49,500/- as loan repayable with interest at 9% p.a. before the third respondent. On 13.05.2006, the Government of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No.70 Co-operative, Food and Consumer Protection Department, by ordering that all the loans given to farmers to be completely waived and the authorities should not take any steps to recover the agricultural loan amounts. Subsequent to the said Government order, another order was passed on 05.07.2006 calling upon the co-operative society officials to adopt the guidelines, which were annexed to the Government Order. According to the guidelines, the petitioner is entitled for waiver, but the respondent/officials have not waived the petitioner's loan and not returned the jewels pledged by him, even after several representations. Inspite of the representations, the third respondent did not consider the same. So the petitioner sent a legal notice on 15.05.2007 to all the respondents calling upon them to waive the agricultural loan, which was obtained by him on 09.03.2006. Even after the receipt of the legal notice, the respondents did not consider the representations and hence the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No:29759/2007 seeking direction to the respondents to consider the representation and legal notice.
3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 12.09.2007, the third respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it was not an agricultural loan and directed the petitioner to repay the aforesaid balance amount to the society. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed a revision petition before the second respondent under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, which was dismissed on 27.05.2016. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has produced the documents, namely, chitta, adangal and other documents to establish that the petitioner was in possession of the agricultural land in Survey Nos.111/2, 111/3, 112/2 which belongs to one Kiliammal as a cultivating tenant. For the development of agriculture, the petitioner availed the said loan by producing the documents. Only on that basis, the respondent society had sanctioned the loan to the petitioner and the rejection of the claim of the petitioner is without considering the aforesaid documents produced by the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 and 2, submitted that the contention of the petitioner is not correct. The petitioner claims that he was a cultivating tenant under one Kiliammal. The aforesaid Kiliammal had given a letter dated 16.04.2016 by informing that she has never leased out the said land to the petitioner and she also deposed that the petitioner had produced forged documents. After the said enquiry, the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the third respondent society. Therefore, the prayer is liable to be rejected.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
6. On perusal of the records it is seen that the petitioner had pledged the jewels and obtained a loan of Rs.49,500/- from the third respondent society. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the third respondent, at the time of sanctioning the loan, had fixed the rate of interest for the loan amount at 9% p.a. which is applicable only for agriculture loan. For any other loan, other than agriculture loan the rate of interest will be higher than 9%. Therefore, the purpose of loan is only for the development of agriculture. On perusal of the documents, namely, adangal, issued by the Village Administrative Officer for the period of 2014- 2015 fasli, it is seen that the petitioner was in possession of the subject land. The next contention of the petitioner is that the letter dated 16.04.2016 obtained from Kiliammal is behind the back of the petitioner and the copy of the said letter was not furnished to the petitioner. Without considering the said facts and circumstances, on the basis of the letter furnished by one Kiliammal, who is the landlord of the subject land, the second respondent has passed the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner, on the ground that the land belonging to one Kiliammal was not leased out to the petitioner. Further the third respondent society has not considered the documents furnished by the petitioner. The letter furnished by the aforesaid Kiliammal was not furnished to the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order passed by the second respondent, is liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly the matter is remitted back to the
D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J
dpq second respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after providing opportunity to the parties concerned.
7. With the above direction W.P.No.26348 of 2016 is allowed.
W.M.P.No.5249 of 2017 is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. It is needless to say that it is for the petitioner to establish before the second respondent, by producing necessary documents that he had been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property, during the relevant period.
15.03.2017 Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No dpq
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu by Secretary to Government Co-operative Food & Consumer Protection Department, Chennai 600 009
2. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies Vellore Region, Vellore.
3. Madapalli, Farmers Service Co-operative Society, Represented by the Special Officer, Madavallam Post, Thirupathur Taluk, Vellore District.
W.P. No.26348 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.22586 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.5249 of 2017