IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12924 of 2009 VINAY PRAKASH, Son of Bhagwat Sah, Village- Chirand, P.S.- Doriganj, District- Saran :---- Petitioner. Versus 1. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA through its Chairman. 2. The Assistant General Manager, Union Bank of India. Nasheman Bhawan (First Floor) Mazharul Haque Path, Patna-1. 3. The Deputy General Manager, Union Bank of India, Nasheman Bhawan (First Floor) Mazharul Haque Path, Patna-1 4. The Chief Manager, Union Bank of India, Nasheman Bhawan (First Floor) Mazharul Haque Path, Patna-1. 5. The Regional Manager, Union Bank of India, Nasheman Bhawan (First Floor) Mazharul Haque Path, Patna-1. 6. The Bank Manager, Union Bank of India, Doriganj Branch at + P.O.- Doriganj, District- Saran :---- Respondents. ----------- 3. 15.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Union Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the “Bank”). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Branch Manager of the Union Bank of India, Doriganj Branch dated 20.08.2009, Annexure-1, whereunder in compliance of the orders of this Court dated 3.8.2009 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 8844 of 2009, Annexure-8 the request of the petitioner to settle his dues with the Branch under OTS Scheme approved by the Reserve Bank of India has been considered with direction to pay a sum of Rs. 2,91,339/- which is inclusive of interest even after the account had become Non- Performing Asset. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the Bank ought not to have charged interest after the account became Non-Performing Asset, further while considering the request to settle the dues under One Time Settlement Scheme the Bank should have taken a lenient view in the matter and such lenient view does not appear to have been taken by the Branch Manager, in the instant case. In the circumstances, petitioner requests that he - 2 - may be allowed liberty to approach the higher officials of the Bank with direction to the higher officials to consider the case of the petitioner for settlement of his dues with the Bank taking liberal view of the matter as business of the petitioner had suffered loss in the preceding years. 4. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the Bank I direct the petitioner to approach the Assistant General Manager of the Bank with a representation against the order dated 20.08.2009, Annexure-1 and the Assistant General Manager in consultation with the Regional Manager should pass appropriate orders in accordance with law taking a liberal view in the matter. 5. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)