1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6675/2005 M/s Saras Veg. Oil Pvt. Ltd. versus The Rajasthan Financial Corporation and another. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Manjul Shrimali, for the petitioner Mr.N.M.Lodha, for the respondent - RFC. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 22nd January, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned action of the RFC under Section 29/30 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. 3. Under the orders of this Court, particularly order dated 12.1.2007, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- on 2/3 28.8.2006 and thereafter on 30.12.2006 a sum of Rs.6,46,000/- and in pursuance of said order dated 12.1.2007 directing the respondent – Corporation to hand over assets to the petitioner, the respondent – RFC so handed over the possession of assets/industrial unit to the petitioner. It was further directed in the said order that thereafter the parties may settle the terms for repayment of the balance amount if any. 4. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is considered expedient to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to make his representation, if not already made and if such representation is pending, to make further additional representation giving complete facts of the case for settlement of balance dues of respondent – RFC if any. It is expected of the respondent – RFC being a Public Authority guided by the principles and statutory provisions contained in the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 to consider such representation of the petitioner objectively and fairly. Such representation of the petitioner if already pending and additional representation which should be made within a period of 6 weeks from today, shall be considered by the competent authority/ Committee of the respondent – RFC within a period of three months thereafter after giving an opportunity of hearing to the 3/3 petitioner. The petitioner is expected to clear off the balance dues as may be determined by such competent authority/Committee in accordance with the directions given by the respondent – RFC. The petitioner is also given a liberty to approach this Court by way of a fresh writ petition if he is aggrieved by the decision of RFC in this regard and if he can make out a case that RFC has not objectively and fairly considered his representation. 5. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.4 Ss/-