IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4473 of 2009(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAVI JOHN @ THAMPI,S/O.LATE K.P.JOHN, KOVILAKATHU HOUSE,CHENNAIPARA.PO,PEECHI, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, ERNAKULAM REGIONAL OFFICE, DORAISWAMI IYER ROAD, COCHIN-35,REP.BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THRISSUR BRANCH, HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR-1. PRESENTLY AT EMMATTY TOWERS,ST.THOMAS COLLEGE ROAD THRISSUR-5,REP.BY THE BRANCH MANAGER. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THRISSUR BRANCH,HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR-1. (PRESENTLY AT EMMATTY TOWERS,ST.THOMAS COLLEGE ROAD, THRISSUR-5. 4. THE GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL OFFICER,KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THRISSUR BRANCH, HIGH ROAD, THRISSUR-1.(PRESENTLY AT EMMATTY TOWERS ST.THOMAS COLLEGE ROAD, THRISSUR-5. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK FOR R1 TO 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 4473 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a facility from the second respondent. He claimed that the said transaction falls within the purview of Agricultural Debt Relief Scheme and requested the fourth respondent, Grievance Redressal Officer to consider his said claim in terms of that scheme. Copy of that representation was given to the Branch Manager also. The Branch Manager has issued Ext.P5. But, in terms of the scheme in question, it is for the Grievance Redressal Officer, who is to decide on the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, the mere issuance of a letter in the matter, by the Branch Manager, does not have any bearing on the claim of the petitioner. This is all the more so, because in terms of the scheme, the Grievance Redressal Officer is to decide the claim and it is his decision that is given the finality as per the scheme. Therefore it is ordered that the fourth respondent will take up Ext.P3 and issue decision on it in accordance with law after taking into consideration, all the relevant materials. The bank will not act against the petitioner merely on the basis of Ext.P5 issued by the Branch Manager. It is so ordered, leaving open all other contentions. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/16/2