IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 10969 of 2002 Between: Akula Pullaiah S/o Venkata Subbaiah. R/o Chintapalli Village, Kolusapadu Mandal, Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Cuddapah. 2 Rayalaseema Grameena Bank , Represented by its Branch Manger. Porumamilla Branch, Cuddapah District, ..... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass an order or direction or writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to write--ff the loans obtained by the petitioner from the second respondent-bank under the Agricultural and Rural debt Relief Act, 1989. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to write off the loans obtained by the petitioner from the second respondent-bank under the Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Act, 1989. 2) The petitioner alleged that he took a crop loan of Rs.4,000/- in the year 1988 from the second respondent-bank and stood as guarantor for the loan taken by one Venkata Subbaiah, who died in the year 1977. The loan obtained by the petitioner is repayable with nominal rate of interest. During the years 1988 and 1989, crops and houses were badly damaged due to floods and heavy rains in the entire Cuddapah district along with other districts in that region. The first respondent declared most of the villages in the district in different mandals as flood affected and to that effect, a notification was published in the district gazettee. In July 1989 also the crops were damaged due to heavy rains and floods. Due to that he could not repay the loan. By virtue of the provisions of the said Act, if a farmer was effected under two phaslies, out of three phaslies, during 1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90, the petitioner is entitled for the relief to an extent of Rs.10,000/-. The petitioner was one of the affected persons and he comes within the purview of the doubt and cyclone affected areas. The second respondent implemented the said Act and considered the loans of some of the agriculturists and granted the said relief, but it was not extended to the petitioner, despite several representations. The second respondent has been demanding him to repay the loan amount together with interest. Therefore, he requested to issue direction as prayed for. 3) The petitioner along with the writ petition has not filed any document to show that his village is in the flood-affected areas and he is eligible to apply the provisions of the above Act for the purpose of granting relief. There is no certificate either from the Collector or concerned authorities that the petitioner is entitled to the write-off the loan amount with interest and penal interest due from him. In the absence of such material, it has to be treated as a disputed question of fact, which has to be decided by the concerned civil Court. The petitioner also did not place any material to show that similar benefit has been extended to any one of the villagers of his village. The material placed before this Court is not sufficient to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and it is liable to be dismissed. 4) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ Dr.G. YETHIRAJULU, J Date: 21.02.2008 Isn ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector, Cuddapah. 2 The Branch Manager, Rayalaseema Grameena Bank , Porumamilla Branch, Cuddapah District, 3. 2 CCs to 4. 2 CD copies