1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15997/2010 Tejaram Chouhan @ Tej Singh vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 6/12/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Vinay Mathur for the petitioner. ****** Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that respondent no.3-Kotak Mahindra Bank being a private bank, the loan advanced to the petitioner could not have been recovered by SDO, Masuda, District Ajmer as arrears of land revenue and neither Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, nor Public Demand Recovery Act could have been invoked in that case. Learned counsel submits that already the respondent-bank initiated proceedings u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and arbitration award has also been passed with regard to the same, whereas the fact is that the tractor for which loan was taken by the petitioner, has been stolen, for which the petitioner has lodged FIR, but the respondent United India Insurance Company Ltd. has not paid the insured sum or the claim, for which the petitioner has approached the District Consumer Protection Forum. Apparently, it is not clear how the SDO could initiate recovery proceedings against the petitioner on the strength of mere 2 stipulation in the agreement between the petitioner and the respondent-bank, particularly when the disputes between the parties are pending before the different forums. The petitioner may in this view of the matter, approach the District Collector against the order passed by the SDO, Masuda, District Ajmer by making suitable representation/appeal, who may consider the legality of the action initiated by the SDO and pass appropriate order within a period of one month from the date of its making. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/-