THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1446 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner borrowed certain amount from respondent No.2 for the purpose of its business. There was some dispute as to the quantum of interest and penal interest levied on the borrowed amount. The petitioner approached respondent No.3, who is Ombudsman of the Reserve Bank of India. A decision was rendered by respondent No.3 through proceedings, dated 17.03.2010. Not satisfied with that, the petitioner approached respondent No.1, the appellate authority, under Clause 9 (3) (d) of the Scheme framed by the Reserve Bank of India. Simultaneously, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Respondent No.1 passed an order, dated 25.05.2010, expressing its inability to decide the appeal, in view of the pendency of the writ petition. The petitioner challenges the levy of interest and penal interest by respondent No.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. There is serious difference of opinion between respondent No.2 on the one hand and the petitioner on the other as to the quantum of interest and penal interest levied on the borrowed amount. Respondent No.3 expressed his opinion. The Scheme provides for an appeal to respondent No.1. The Appellate Authority would be in a better position to examine the matter from various angles. Even now, the petitioner can pursue that remedy. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue the remedy before respondent No.1, who in turn, shall pass orders in the appeal on merits. Pending disposal of the appeal, the petitioner shall be entitled to operate its account with respondent No.2 in case a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs) is kept in reserve. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:21.03.2011 Note: Issue cc in two days. (B/o) kdl