THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR Writ Petition No.24676 OF 2010 14-12-2010 Between: Bitragunta Srinivasa Rao ……….Petitioner And The Bank of Baroda, rep. by its Branch manager, Khammam Branch and others. ………Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR Writ Petition No.24676 OF 2010 ORDER : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) The grievance of the petitioner is that he is an ex-employee of the respondents-bank. While he is in service, he obtained housing loan from the respondents-Bank and after paying instalments promptly for sometime, due to his ill-health, he committed default in payment. Later the respondents-bank issued notice dated 22-12-2009 under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, calling upon him to pay Rs.12,53,766/- with interest towards dues of his housing loan. Immediately, he approached the respondents-bank and requested to apportion the due sums payable to him on account of his compulsory retirement and also made a representation 18-02-2010 to the respondent- Bank requesting them to apply One Time Settlement Scheme to him so as to discharge the amount due to the bank. But the respondents without considering his representation, threatened him that they are going to take physical possession of his house and published the same in the paper publication dated 17-09-2010. Hence, he approached this Court and filed the present writ petition challenging the notice dated 22-12-2009 and for direction to the respondents to consider his representation dated 18-02- 2010. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner has made a representation to the respondent-bank and requested to apportion the due sums payable to him on account of his compulsory retirement, a direction may be given to the respondents-bank to dispose his representation. 4. As seen from the record, it is clear that the petitioner has made a representation requesting the respondent-bank to apply One Time Settlement Scheme to him so as to discharge the amount due to the bank and the same is pending consideration before the respondents-bank. Time and again, the Supreme Court also held in its judgments that in the cases of this nature, the bank has to dispose of the representations made by the borrowers under Section 13 (3A) and communicate its reasons to the borrowers and discharge its responsibility to act in accordance with law. 5. In the circumstances, the respondents-bank is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation made by the petitioner and communicate the reasons to the petitioner, within a period of three weeks from today. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED Dated:14-12-2010 ________________________ JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR kvr