WP(C) 4261/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BP KATAKEY Perused the affidavit dated 13.9.2011 filed by the petitioner relating to the da sti service on the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10. It appears from the said affidavit and the copy of the notice enclosed that such notices were received by the respondent Nos. 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10. The affidavit f urther reveals that when the notice was tendered to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 they have refused to accept the same. None appears for the respondent Nos. 4, 5, 9 and 10. Respondent No. 7, however, has entered appearance and filed the affidavit. In view of the above, the notice is deemed to be served on the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The present writ petition will proceed ex parte against the respondent N os. 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10. Heard Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms Phukan, learned Stat e counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 8 as well as Ms U Borgohain, l earned counsel for the respondent No. 7. This writ petition is taken up for disposal today itself in view of the order da ted 24.8.2011. The grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that though vide comm unication dated 30.9.2010 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Assam Khadi and Village Industries Board, the Branch Manager, State Bank of India Kamalpur, Son eswar Branch was directed to consider the project of the petitioner which has be en approved by the task force to get the benefit under the Prime Minister Employ ment Generation Programme nothing has been done by the bank authority till date. The petitioner, therefore, prays that this writ petition may be disposed of wit h a direction to the respondent Bank to consider the project of the petitioner a nd upon such consideration if the petitioner’s project is found to be viable the amount may be released to him. Ms Phukan, learned State counsel submits that it is the State Bank of India to s crutinize the project of the petitioner and to release the amount if the project is found to be viable. Ms Burgohain, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7 relying on the affidavit filed has supported the submission made by the learned State counsel. Having regard to the aforesaid submission made the writ petition is disposed of directing the State Bank of India, Kamalpur, Soneswar Branch, to consider the pr oject of the petitioner pursuant to the communication dated 30.9.2010 if such co nsideration has already not been made and the proposal has not been rejected. Such consideration shall be made if not already made within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order to be produced by t he petitioner before the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kamalpur, Soneswar Branch The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No cost.