IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22038 of 2009(Y) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- VALSALA , AGED 49, W/O. VIJAYAKUMAR, R/AT BINDHIA BHAVAN, PERUMPUZHA P.O., PUNUKKANNUR, KUNDARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) SMT.REKHA NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LOANS, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THAHAZILDAR , REVENUE RECOVERY OFFICE, KOLLAM. R1 BY POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, SC, KSHB R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.K.BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 4th August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a housing loan from the first respondent, available to the Middle Income Group (MIG in short) to the tune of about Rs. 2 lakhs. It is stated that the petitioner was prompt enough in remitting the monthly installments , but she could not continue to effect payments because of some serious ailments, due to 'Parkinson's disease' from the year 2002. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite all the adverse circumstances, the petitioner, with the intent to clear the entire liability, had approached the respondents on many an occasion, seeking to furnish a statement of accounts giving credit to the payments already effected and also to extend eligible concessions as being extended to other similarly situated persons by the Housing Board. It is stated that the first respondent did not pay any W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009 2 heed to the grievances projected by the petitioner, which made her to approach this Court, particularly when confronted with the Revenue Recovery steps as borne by Ext. P1. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent , on instruction, submits that the benefit of 'OTS' was not available at the relevant time, when the petitioner approached the first respondent. However, the learned Counsel submits that necessary instructions have been obtained from the first respondent, stating that a new notification with regard to 'OTS' has already been issued on 31.07.2009 and if the petitioner approaches the first respondent with a fresh application within one month, claiming the benefit thereon, the same will definitely be considered in accordance with law. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to approach the first respondent to extend the benefit of 'OTS' by filing a detailed representation within one month, also referring to the payments already effected. On such an event, the said application shall be considered by the first respondent in accordance with law and all the eligible benefits shall be W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009 3 extended to the petitioner, enabling her to clear the liability as provided under the Scheme. Subject to the above, all the coercive steps, stated as being pursued against the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance, till appropriate orders are passed on the application to be preferred by the petitioner for 'OTS' as specified above. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk