IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1375 of 2008 (M/S) Hira Singh Bisht, S/O Kamal Singh Bisht R/O St. Joseph College, Tallital Nainital, District Nainital and another. ..…. Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand, through Secretary in the Department of Revenue, Dehradun and four others. … Respondents. Ms. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri K.P.Upadhyay, learned Additional C.S.C. for the respondent no. 1, 3 &4. Sri M.C.Pande, learned counsel for the respondent no.2-Bank. Date August 08, 2008. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not take any coercive measure against the petitioners. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to receive the balance amount of the loan from the petitioners in easy instalment of Rs. 1,500- to Rs. 2,000/- per month from Rs. 10,000/-. III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the recovery citation dated 27-2-2008. IV. To pass any other and further orders, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. V. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioners. According to the petitioners, petitioner no. 1 is a local taxi driver and petitioner no. 2 is the brother of petitioner no. 1. In the year 2003, one Sri Lalit Prashad S/O Govind Ram, R/O St. Joseph College, Tallital, Nainital, took loan of Rs. One lakh from the respondent no. 2 and the petitioners being neighbours stood guarantors of the said loan. The borrower Lalit Prashad escaped from Nainital without any information to the petitioners. The petitioners received a notice from the respondent no. 2-Bank, which was addressed to Lalit Prashad. Then the petitioners made every effort to know the whereabouts of the said Lalit Prashad, but failed. Ultimately, the recovery citation was issued by the Collector Nainital dated 27-2-2008 (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition) against the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioners have deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000/- on 14-5-2008 with the respondent no.2-Bank vide Annexure No. 32. The petitioners are ready and willing to pay the entire outstanding amount of loan in easy instalments. In the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2-Bank has submitted that the respondent-bank has no objection if the entire outstanding loan amount along with recovery charges is deposited by the petitioners in monthly instalments of Rs. 5,000/- each before recovery officer. In the above circumstances, the petitioners are directed to pay the entire outstanding loan amount plus recovery charges before the Recovery Officer in monthly instalments of Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand) each and the last instalment payable may be of uneven amount. The first monthly instalment shall be payable on the 1st day of September 2008 and subsequent instalment shall fall due on the 1st day of each month thereafter. In case of default in payment of any of the monthly instalments, as directed above, the respondents shall be at liberty to recover the entire outstanding amount in lump sum. If the payments arte made by the petitioners, as directed above, the impugned recovery citation (Annexure No. 2) shall not be given effect to. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. No order as to costs. ( B.S. Verma, J.) RCP