THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.4842 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner obtained agricultural loan from Sompeta Branch of State Bank of India, the 4th respondent herein (for short ‘the Bank’). As a security for repayment thereof, he mortgaged agricultural lands, to an extent of Ac.4.83 cents in different survey numbers of Kalingaputtuga Village, Kanchili Mandal, Srikakulam District. The Government of India introduced the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008 (for short ‘the Scheme’), providing for waiver of loans extended to marginal and small farmers, obtained from various financial institutions, including Nationalized Banks, Co-operative Societies, etc., subject to certain conditions. The petitioner was not extended that benefit, on the ground that he is not a small farmer, and that he possessed land, exceeding five acres. The petitioner contends that, though he inherited Ac.5.67 cents of land from his ancestors, he alienated about 85 cents of land, at different points of time, on different occasions, and that by the time he took loan, his holding was only Ac.4.83 cents. Therefore, he prays for a direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of the Scheme. Heard Sri V. Brahmaiah Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri M. Narender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 4, and Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondent No.6. There is no dispute of the fact that the petitioner obtained loan from the Bank, by mortgaging his property, to an extent of Ac.4.83 cents. If that was the only land held by him, he is entitled to be extended the benefit of the Scheme. The assertion made by the petitioner in this regard is countered by the respondents, by making reference to pattadar pass books and other documents. This Court cannot give any definite finding in this regard. The Revenue Authorities would be in a better position to certify the actual holding of the petitioner, at the relevant point of time. In case it emerges that the petitioner owned less than five acres land, by the time he was extended the loan, necessary steps need to be taken, in this regard. On the other hand, if the holding of the petitioner is proved to be more than five acres, he cannot be extended any benefit. Learned Standing Counsel for the Bank submits that the Scheme has expired, and there is not much, that the Bank can do, even if it emerges that the petitioner was a small farmer. If that is the case, the correspondence can be undertaken with the concerned, in the Ministry. If the petitioner is otherwise entitled for the benefit, he cannot be denied the same, on account of a doubt, expressed by the implementing agencies. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that, a) the petitioner shall approach the concerned Tahsildar, to certify his actual holding of the land, as on the date on which, he obtained the loan, and the Tahsildar shall issue a certificate in this regard, within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of the application; b) if the certificate issued by the Tahsildar discloses that the petitioner owned less than five acres land, as on the date of taking of loan, the Bank shall extend the benefit of waiver to the petitioner, if it is possible for them, or take up the matter with the concerned Ministry, for necessary action in this regard; and c) if, on the other hand, the holding is found to be more than five acres, no further steps need be taken. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.26-02-2010. KO