IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2011 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7344 of 2011(P) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. MANMADAN. P.K, PARAPPALLIL, MADUKKA. P.O, ERUMELI NORTH VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. M.R. BHASKARAN, MUTTATHU HOUSE, ELAPPALLY VILLAGE, EDADU. P.O, MOOLAMATTAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.SREEDEVI KYLASANATH, SMT.SHALEENA RAJAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC/ST DEVELOPMENT (B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, MUNDAKAYAM, 686 513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SECRETARY, IDUKKI HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, NO.1, 155, IDUKKI COLONY.P.O, IDUKKY-685 602. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN. R3 BY ADV. MR.T.A. SHAJI, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7344 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of March 2011 JUDGMENT The 1st and 2nd petitioners, who belonged to scheduled Tribe community, availed a loan of ` 50,000/- and `1,00,000 respectively from the 3rd and 4th respondents. However, the amount was not repaid as agreed, because of the alleged frustrating pecuniary circumstances and the petitioners turned to be defaulter, when the Bank proceeded with steps for realization of the due amount as borne by Exts. P3 and P3(a) notices issued on 04.02.2011 and 21.02.2011 respectively claiming a sum of `66,000 and ` 1,82,187 respectively. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, the petitioners are entitled to have the benefit of 'waiver', in view of the Scheme promulgated by the Government, particularly, as discernible from Ext. P1 Government Order issued in this regard. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also places reliance on Ext P4 judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court, whereby the course pursued by the concerned respondents stipulating a 'cut off' W.P.(C) No.7344/2011 - 2 - date has been deprecated, observing that, the benefits that are being extended to the 'fishermen folk' are liable to be extended in the case of the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribes, since they are probably in no way better positioned than the members of the Fishermen community. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners have already brought up the matter before the first respondent by filing Ext. P5 and P5(a) representations and that the same is still to be finalized. 3. Heard the learned senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. 4. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this Court does not propose to issue notice to the 3rd respondent for the time being. 5. In the said circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 and P3(a) and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law and in tune with the contents of Ext. P1 and Ext. P4 judgment, with notice to the petitioners and also to the 3rd respondent. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) No.7344/2011 - 3 - The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the Writ Petition before the first respondent for taking further steps. 'Status quo' shall be maintained till such time. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE