1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1108/2003 M/s Bhati Cold Tyre versus The State of Rajasthan and ors. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Pappu Sangwa on behalf of Mr.Anand Purohit, for the petitioner Mr.Rakesh Sinha on behalf of Ms. Pratishtha Dave, for the repsondents. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 26th February, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. By order dated 3.5.2006, this Court had clarified that since the interim stay order granted on 21.10.2003 was not extended by the Court, there was no interim order against the respondent – RFC restraining it from proceedings in accordance with the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. 2/2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner however points that the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation to the respondent – RFC to consider its case with regard to waiver of panel interest and grant of installments. 4. Though the nature of dispute involved in the present writ petition necessarily involves disputed questions of facts which cannot be gone into in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, yet it goes without saying that if a representation is made by the borrower like the present petitioner, it is the duty of the respondent – Corporation or competent authority i.e. Manager (Development) RFC, Jaipur to consider such representation and dispose of the same by a speaking order. 5. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to move appropriate representation before the cometent authority in the respondent – Corporation and such authority is expected to decide the same in accordance with law. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.8 Ss/-