IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 23988 of 2010(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.P.ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 67, S/O.LATE PEERANNAN RAWTHAR, PULINTHARA HOUSE, EATHUVADAKARA P.O., MANIMALA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA, SRI.P.A.SALIM, SMT.ROSAMMA MATHEW, SRI.K.THAVAMONY, SRI.ANZAR BASHEER, SRI.R.THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, SRI.PRATHEUSH.M.ANAND. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GOVERNOR, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 3. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, ZONAL OFFICE, KOTTYAM- 686 002. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MANIMALA BRANCH, MANIMALA, PIN 686 543. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMAL, CGC R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.DILEEP, SRI.R.S.KALKURA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.23988 of 2010 (W) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4, an order dated 02/03/2010 passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting Ext.P2 representation made by the petitioner seeking the benefit of the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme. 2. The petitioner availed of agricultural loan from the respondent Bank for Kayyala construction and the loan was to be repaid within 5 years in 10 half yearly instalments of Rs.20,000/- each. No repayment was made, and in the meanwhile, the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 was announced. The petitioner applied for the benefit of the Scheme and a debt relief of Rs.1,72,681/- was sanctioned. He approached the authorities claiming total waiver and pursuant to the directions in Ext.P3, the matter was considered and is now rejected by Ext.P4. Claim of the petitioner is that he is entitled to full waiver of the liability. 3. First of all, neither Ext.P2 representation made by the WP(C) No.23988/2010 -2- petitioner nor any other materials or pleadings in this writ petition contain sufficient particulars to conclude on this claim of the petitioner. That apart, provisions of Ext.P1 Scheme define 'small farmer' and 'marginal farmer' with reference to the extent of the land held by the respective category of farmers, and only if an applicant satisfies those conditions, can he claim full waiver as contemplated in clause 5 of the Scheme. Therefore, in the absence of such materials, this Court cannot find fault with the respondents in having taken the view, as is seen in Ext.P4. Be that as it may, having regard to the actual particulars, if the petitioner is eligible to claim the status of a small farmer or marginal farmer, who has availed of investment loan eligible for the benefit of waiver, I leave it open to the petitioner to make a fresh representation with all those particulars, to the 2nd respondent in which event, the 2nd respondent will reconsider the claim in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme and in accordance with law. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) The words “2nd respondent” occurring in the 5th and 6th lines of WP(C) No.23988/2010 -3- the last paragraph of judgment dated 16/09/2010 in WP(C) No.23988/2010 are corrected and substituted as “3rd respondent” vide order dated 30/11/2010 in I.A.No.15366/2010. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial) jg