IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16686 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BIJU THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 39 YEARS, ATHANICKAL HOUSE, PULAKUZHA.P.O, KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU) SRI.I.P.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE THAHSILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOOTHATTUKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KOOTHATTUKULAM. ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 16686 of 2010 I ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner availed a loan of Rs.1 lakh from the respondent Bank on 23-02-2007 under the 'Kerala State Self- Employment Scheme for the Registered Unemployed', introduced by the Central Government for such individuals. However, after availing the loan, the repayment turned to be a seldom exercise, under which circumstances, there was no other alternative for the Bank to proceed with further steps under the Revenue Recovery Act for realisation of the due amount, which, in turn, is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The main grievance of the petitioner appears to be the alleged default on the part of the respondent Bank in deducting the subsidy of 20% from the total due amount. The respondent Bank has filed a statement stating that the subsidy amount was obtained only on 07-11-2008 and still, the Bank applied the same to the loan amount of the petitioner giving credit with effect from 26-06-2007 itself and the balance amount has been worked out as Rs.98,327/- after giving credit to the subsidy. The learned counsel WPC.16686/2010 : 2 : for the petitioner submits that the plight of the petitioner is very poor and that the petitioner might be permitted to wipe off the entire liability by way of reasonable instalments. 3. After hearing both the sides, this Court permits the petitioner to clear the entire liability in 'ten' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be paid on or before the 10th of August, 2010, to be followed by the other instalments to be effected on or before the 10th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that if the petitioner commits any default in clearing the due amount as above, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in lump sum. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) aks