THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.Nos.4370, 4526, 4528, 5082 and 6155 of 2005 Dt.23.1.2006 Between: Sari Subhash Reddy and others … Petitioners And The Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy and 2 others. … Respondents W.P.Nos.4370, 4526, 4528, 5082 and 6155 of 2005 COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved in these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by a common order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Co-operation and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society. It is stated that the petitioners are farmers and members of the concerned Primary Agricultural Co-operative Societies situate at different Mandals of Medak Distict. It is stated that the Government by its notification dated 26.10.2004 declared 45 Mandals of Medak District as drought affected for the year 2004-05 as per G.O.Ms.No.690, 691 Rev. (DM:II) Department, dt.4.9.2004 for the purpose of facilitating all commercial and co-operative banks, insurance companies and similar other financial institutions to extend liberalized credit and support to the affected farmers and for re- scheduling of loans. A perusal of the said notification dated 26.10.2004 goes to show that all villages in the said 45 Mandals of Medak District were declared as drought areas for year 2004-2005 alone. It is stated that for the year 2005-06 there is good rainfall and the said instructions are no more in vogue. It is, however, stated that pursuant to the interim orders of this Court some of the petitioners paid 1/4th of the demanded amount and some of them are not paid the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the demanded amount provided the concerned Primary Agricultural Co-operative Societies/Banks agrees to receive the amount by accepting one time settlement and though they have made representations before the concerned Co-operative Societies/Banks requesting to settle the amount by way of one time settlement, the same have not been considered and disposed of so far. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Co-operative Society submits that loans were obtained for purchase of tractors and other equipment, but not for agricultural operations and as such they are not entitled for one time settlement. I am not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case as the representations for one time settlement are pending before the concerned authorities and it is for them to consider and dispose of the same. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the concerned respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the representations made by the petitioners, if any pending, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. ________________ (V.ESWARAIAH, J.) 23.1.2006 kpr