The court dismissed a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings for a defaulted loan under the Chief Minister Gramoudyog Rojgar Yojna, finding no error in the process.
Writ petition dismissed; recovery proceedings upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28317 of 2018
Petitioner :- Umesh Chandra Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwini Kumar,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar Tripathi,Yashwant Singh
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for the State Authorities/Respodent nos. 1 to 3, Sri B.D. Pandey holding brief of Sri Santosh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 and Sri Yashwant Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5 and 6, .
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the proceedings of recovery of loan as arrears of land revenue. The petitioner was given a loan under the Chief Minister Gramoudyog Rojgar Yojna for a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs in 2011. One condition of the loan was that the petitioner will deposit the entire amount according to the EMI fixed and interest thereon would be paid by the Uttar Pradesh Khadi and Gramoudyog Board. The petitioner did not deposit the EMI as per schedule and therefore, proceedings were initiated to recover the amount under the U.P. Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972. A legal notice has been served upon the petitioner dated 16.06.2017 demanding a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs for recovery of loan. The recovery certificate has been issued pursuant to the aforesaid notice.
It is not disputed that the petitioner had taken a loan under the scheme and it is also not disputed that the petitioner defaulted in
payment, as such, the recovery has been issued.
We do not find any error in the proceedings and therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the recovery proceedings as no justifiable reason has been given to interfere with the same.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed .
Order Date :- 28.8.2018 Arun Gangwar
(Rajiv Gupta, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the recovery proceedings of a defaulted Gramoudyog loan under the U.P. Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 are maintainable.
Umesh Chandra
State Of U P
5 Others
Abhinava Upadhya
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
