IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 18112 OF 2005 DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 31, 2006 Parties Name Mukesh ..PETITIONER VERSUS Prescribed Authority -cum- S.D.O.(C) Narwana and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL PRESENT: Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Deepali Puri, Adv., for respondent No.2 JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order. This writ petition was filed to lay challenge to the recovery certificate Annexure P-3, issued by the competent authority. During pendency of this writ petition, when the matter was taken up on August 8, 2006, following order was passed by this Court: “After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court feels that let the Bank calculate the amount in each case on the basis of 'one time settlement'. The amount so calculated be brought to the notice of this Court on the next date of hearing and petitioner then will be asked to pay that amount either in lump sum or in instalments.” Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate, for the respondent has very fairly stated that the Bank is ready to settle account of the petitioner under One Time Settlement Scheme of the Bank. It has further been said by her that if the petitioner approaches the Bank within fifteen days from today, the Bank shall supply him the calculations and thereafter he would be asked to repay the said amount either in lump sum or in instalments, as per the Scheme, referred to above. This satisfies counsel for the petitioner. In view of the fair stand taken as on today, order Annexure P-3 does not stand and the same is set aside. The petitioner is directed to approach the respondent – Bank within fifteen days for settlement. This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be given Dasti on payment of usual charges. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( Pritam Pal ) August 31, 2006. Judge DKC