IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 24650 of 2008(H) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- K.C. JACOB, S/O. CHACKO, AGED 62, ELAVUNGAL, NO. 51A, BALAJI NAGAR, PONGAMOODU, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI SRI.P.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENTS : ----------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHANTHI NAGAR, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R2-3 SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14 /08/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24650 of 2008(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE FROM FEDERAL BANK DATED 30/6/2007 REG. CLOSURE OF LOAN. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE FROM FEDERAL BANK DATED 24/6/2008 REG. CLOSING OF LOAN ACCOUNT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF SLIP ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, VENJARAMOOD DATED 30/6/2007 IN RESPECT OF AVAILMENT OF LOAN. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS DATED 25/06/2008. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30/6/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE R2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION DATED 30/6/2007. ANNEXURE R2(b): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.5/2008 DATED 27/05/2008. ANNEXURE R2(c): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.19/2008 DATED 4/06/2008 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 24650 of 2008 ................................................. Dated this the 14th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be an agriculturist eligible for benefits of the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008, declared by the Government of India. The petitioner contends that he originally took an agricultural loan from the Federal Bank which was later closed and was shifted to the State Bank of Travancore, the 3rd respondent herein. The State Bank of Travancore sanctioned the loan for 12 months from 30.8.2007. The petitioner is claiming the benefits of the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 in respect of that loan. According to him, the present loan with the 3rd respondent should be construed as a continuation of the earlier loan from the Federal Bank and in that view the petitioner would become eligible for waiver of the debt under the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) That, issue a writ of mandamus or some other writ, order or direction, directing respondents 2 and 3 W.P(C) No. 24650 of 2008 -2- to waive the entire Agricultural Loan, availed by the petitioner and return the gold ornaments which was given as security at the time of availing the loan; ii) That, issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing respondents 2 and 3 to consider the Exts.P5 and P6 representations, and pass orders as per guidelines provided under the Scheme; iii) That, issue a writ of mandamus or some other writ order or direction to the respondents to declare that the loan availed by the petitioner is Agricultural Loan and he is entitled for the relief being as Agriculturist.” 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3 wherein it is stated that petitioners loan application dated 30.6.2007 requesting the 3rd respondent bank for a loan of Rs.1 lakh against the pledge of gold ornament weighing 174.05 grams has been sanctioned for 12 months from 30.6.2007. The petitioner would be eligible for the benefit of the Debt Waiver and Relief Scheme only if the said debt was overdue as on 31.12.2007 and remains unpaid until 20.2.2008. The contention is that the petitioner's loan was not overdue as on 31.12.2007 and does not continue to remain unpaid as on 20.2.2008. Therefore according to the respondents 2 and 3, the petitioner is not eligible for waiver as per the scheme. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. W.P(C) No. 24650 of 2008 -3- Even assuming, then though I have serious doubts about the validity of the said contention, that the loan sanctioned by the 3rd respondent is a continuation of the loan granted by the Federal Bank, the petitioner has to still prove that he is eligible for the waiver as per the scheme. It is not disputed before me that the petitioner would be eligible for waiver under the scheme only if the petitioner comes within the purview of the said scheme. For that the petitioner should show that his loan was overdue as on 31.12.2007 and remains unpaid on 20.2.2008. The respondents 2 and 3 have denied it to be so. The petitioner has not been able to prove otherwise by adequate materials on record. Therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs