IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND NINE WRIT PETITION No.20347 of 2002 Between: P. Sumitra … Petitioner And Visakha Grameena Bank, rep., by its Chairman, Sreekakula & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri V.S.R. Anjaneyulu Counsel for the respondents: Ms. V. Uma Devi This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20347 of 2002 ORDER:- In this writ petition, the only grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not extended the benefit of One Time Settlement (for short, ‘OTS’) Scheme despite such a request having been made by her as far back as 16.10.2001. At the hearing, Ms. V. Uma Devi, learned Standing counsel for the respondents, fairly submitted that as the material placed by the petitioner reveals that she has applied for OTS scheme in response to notice dated 16.10.2001, on the very same day itself, the respondents should consider the petitioner’s case under the OTS scheme notwithstanding the fact that the said scheme was subsequently discontinued. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the parties that in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court, the petitioner deposited 50% of the outstanding amount. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s request for OTS scheme without referring to the fact that the scheme was discontinued subsequently. The respondents shall pass an appropriate order within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.25514 of 2002 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 26.11.2009 ES