1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.6084/1999 Kalu Ram & Ors. Vs. Asstt. Collector, Srimadhopur & Anr. Date of order : 01.09.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr. M. Sheromani for Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sharma for petitioners. Mr. Akbar Khan for Mr. M.A.Khan for respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 16.03.1998 (Annexure/7) passed by the Assistant Collector, Srimadhopur Distt. Sikar (Rajasthan) (respondent No.1) to the extent of excess amount awarded and recovered and further prayed to direct the respondent No.2 (Punjab National Bank, Branch Srimadhopur Distt. Sikar) to refund the amount with interest. Submission of the counsel for the petitioners is that their liability under Section 14 of the Rajasthan Agricultural Credit Operations (Removal of Difficulties) Act, 1974 was not properly decided by the Assistant Collector, Srimadhopur Distt. Sikar (Raj.) vide his order dated 16.03.1998 (Annexure/7). The Assistant Collector has relied upon the conditions of the agreement of loan and has given the finding that the petitioners have not made the payment of even single penny and deliberately delayed the payment, therefore, the bank has rightly determined the liability of Rs. 4,14,210/- (Rs. Four lakh fourteen thousand two hundred and ten only) on 15.03.1998 and subsequently a Certificate dated 2 22.02.1999 (Annexure/8) was also issued by the bank whereby it has been mentioned that the petitioners have deposited the entire amount i.e. Rs. 4,72,074/- (Rs. Four lakhs seventy two thousand and seventy four only) and their account have been closed after depositing the said amount. The present writ petition has been filed and the aforesaid submissions has made by the petitioners. Per contra, counsel for the respondents has draw the attention of this Court upon the agreement (Annexure/3) wherein it has been mentioned in para 2 of the agreement that in case neither the installment not interest has been paid then 2.5 per cent six monthly interest will also be charged. I have gone through the record of the writ petition and also perused the rival submissions of the parties and is of the view that the Assistant Collector has committed not error in placing reliance on the agreement and determined the liability and his work found to be correct and as per the bank clause. The writ petition has no force and the same is dismissed accordingly. (PREM SHANKER ASOPA),J. Gandhi H/10