IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 18TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 24591 of 2010(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SIBY PAUL, ENANICKAL HOUSE, VELIYELCHAL, KEERAMPARA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, THATTAKADU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KEERAMPARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KEERAMPARA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, 686691,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY - 686691. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 33. 3. THE MANAGER, THE KEERAMPARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KEERAMPARA P.O. KOTHAMANGALAM - 686691. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVINDAKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.24591/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 2.8.2006 IN LOAN ACCOUNT NO.KCCW/0-29/99. P2:- COPY OF THE PROMISSORY NOTE EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 2.8.06. P3:- COPY OF THE GUIDELINES DTD. 5.6.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 7.1.2010 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 6.10.2009 IN WPC. 32969/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.24591 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner availed of a loan from the 1st respondent Bank. Default was committed and he claimed the benefit of Ext.P3 Scheme announced by the Government of India for waiver of liabilities incurred by agriculturists. The benefit was not extended to the petitioner. Therefore he made Ext.P4 representation also. It is thereafter this writ petition is filed. 2. Issue raised in this writ petition is similar to the one that arose in Ext.P5 judgment. Therefore at this stage, having regard to the pendency of Ext.P4 representation made by the petitioner before the Grievance Redressal Officer, all that is required is that the 1st respondent should consider the claim of the petitioner for the benefit of Ext.P3 Scheme in the light of the directions contained in Ext.P5 judgment. This the 1st respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any W.P (C) No. 24591 of 2010 2 rate, within two months of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge