IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2009 / 1ST ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17233 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- SULOCHANA, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. LATE SUKUMARAN, THOTTINKAL KALATHIL, THIRINJAKOTTIL, AYILOOR VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, S.KRISHNA PRASAD, AGED 42 YEARS, OF -DO- BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------ 1. CHITTUR PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRL. & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., NO.P-619, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O. CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, NABARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 17233 OF 2009 (Y) ===================== Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The grievance in this writ petition is against Ext.P7. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P1 partition deed, 2.43 acres of paddy field and garden land were allowed to her deceased husband. After the expiry of her husband, petitioner availed of two loans of Rs.75,000/- each from the 1st respondent. It is stated that on account of crop failure, petitioner could not pay the amount and finally by Ext.P5, petitioner applied for the benefit of waiver of the liability, as provided for under Ext.P6 scheme. In Ext.P5, petitioner claimed the benefit as a small farmer, however in Ext.P7 reply given by the Bank, she has been informed that she can be given only 25% waiver treating herself as “other farmer”. It is aggrieved by Ext.P7 in so far as it restricts her eligibility to 25%, the writ petition is filed. 2. In my view, at this stage, it is not necessary for this Court to consider the grievances raised. If the petitioner is aggrieved, it is open to the petitioner to move the Grievance Redressal Officer, who has been nominated as per the scheme to WPC 17233/09 :2 : deal with the grievances such as the one raised by the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to move the Grievance Redressal Officer and seek her remedies against Ext.P7. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp