WP(C) 1914/2003 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA All the writ petitions involve same set of facts and the relief prayed f or being one and the same, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Out of the aforementioned four writ petitions, steps for service of noti ce in WP(C) No. 1914/2003 and WP(C) No. 1897/2003 have not been taken as per the office notes dated 4.9.09 and 21.10.09. On the other hand, in all the writ peti tions, interim orders are operating in favour of the petitioners. The matter pertains to obtaining loan by the petitioners under Prime Min ister’s Rojgar Yojana (PMRY) scheme. The petitioners after having obtained the l oan through the particular process, failed to liquidate the same by repaying the loan to the bank. They having failed to repay the loan, proceeding was initiate d against them including Bakijai proceeding for recovery of the amount. It is in that situation, the petitioners approached this Court by filling the instant wr it petitions. In all the writ petitions, interim orders are operating to the eff ect that no recovery proceeding be initiated against the petitioners. In the writ petitions, the common ground urged is that the purpose for w hich the loan was sanctioned, could not be implemented and that for getting the loan amount, the petitioners had to suffer a lot. Payment of money towards getti ng the loan has also been alleged in the writ petition. The respondent bank has filed its affidavit denying the pleas raised in the writ petition. In the affida vit filed in WP(C) 278/2003, it has been stated that the rate of interest has be en charged as per the norms and contract rate. It has also been stated that the petitioners could not have filed the writ petition jointly instead of agitating their individual grievance. In the affidavit-in-opposition, the allegation of br ibery etc has been denied. It has been stated that the petitioners after obtaini ng the loan for doing the job under the particular scheme, cannot resile back fr om the agreement so as to claim that they are not liable to repay the loan. Payment of loan and repayment of the same are governed by the terms and conditions of the agreement for loan. It is an admitted position that all the pe titioners obtained the loan for the particular purpose. The amount involved is p ublic money. The petitioners after obtaining the loan for the particular purpose , cannot stall the proceedings that had been initiated towards recovery of the s ame. The ground urged in the writ petitions are all vague and indefinite. Fillin g of the writ petitions is nothing but a device to stall the lawful proceeding t owards recovering the amount. For all the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petit ions and accordingly they are dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own c osts. Interim orders operating in all the writ petitions stands vacated. Registry shall forthwith forward the copies of this order to the respond ent bank for their necessary follow up action. Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam, takes notic e of this order.