THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 810 of 2009. Guru Charan Singh, S/O Late Nand Singh, R/O Village Matiha, Post Nanak Matta, Tehsil Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. State of Uttarakhand through District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar. 2. Tehsildar, Sitarganj, Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Branch Manager, Udham Singh Nagar, District Cooperative Bank Ltd. Branch at Vidora, Sitarganj. …Respondents. Date February 23, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. M.C.Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. K.C.Tiwari, Advocate, for the respondent No. 3- Bank. Heard and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents for considering the case of the petitioner under the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008. Relief in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the recovery certificate/citation (Annexure-2) has also been sought. According to the petitioner, he took loan of Rs. 5,07,990/- for purchase of tractor jointly with his mother and uncle Smt. Jeet Kaur and Pritam Singh respectively in the month of July 2006. The agricultural land of the petitioner was mortgaged and the Bank fixed six monthly instalment of Rs. 35000/- for repayment of loan. Due to heavy rains and flood, the petitioner suffered loss of crops and he could not repay the instalments for repayment of loan, fixed by the Bank. Thereafter, the Government launched the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 and the petitioner is covered 2 under the said scheme. Ultimately, the recovery citation (Annexure-2 to the petition) was issued against the petitioner for recovery of Rs. 6,20,928/- plus interest and recovery charges, which is impugned in this petition. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.3-Bank and along with the same, a copy of statement of account has also been annexed. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to repay the entire outstanding amount under the recovery citation in easy instalments. On the other hand, Mr. K.C.Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.3-Bank has submitted that the Bank would have no objection, if the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-(one lac) within a period of one month and the rest of the amount is paid in four equal quarterly instalments, the last being payable by 31st March 2011. In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rs. One lac) within a period of one month before the recovery officer-respondent no.2. Thereafter, the petitioner shall pay the rest of the amount along with recovery charges in four equal quarterly instalments. The first quarterly instalment shall be payable by 30th June 2010 and the subsequent instalments shall be payable by 30th September 2010, 31st December 2010 and 31st March 2011. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to deposit any of the instalments including the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, as directed above, the respondents would be at liberty to recover the entire outstanding amount along with recovery charges from the petitioner in lump-sum. Accordingly, the impugned recovery certificate and recovery citation (Annexure-2) shall not be given effect to by the respondents. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP 3