Disposed¶19

Amol Kesarvani v. Union of India and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2026WRIC/12826/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (WRIT - C No. 12826 of 2026, Allahabad High Court, decided April 3, 2026) — recovery under Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 — applicability to lending under Central Sector Scheme / Agricultural Infrastructure Fund — Section 2(g) 'State-sponsored scheme' — U.P. Agricultural Credit Act, 1973 — interim order restraining coercive recovery without leave of the Court — instructions called for — matter listed 23.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection: no coercive measure pursuant to the recovery without leave of the Court; instructions called for from standing counsel and Bank counsel; matter listed on 23.04.2026. ¶19

Amol Kesarvani vs Union of India and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim protection: no coercive measure pursuant to the recovery without leave of the Court; instructions called for from standing counsel and Bank counsel; matter listed on 23.04.2026.

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether recovery of dues under the Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 could be initiated against the petitioner for lending made under the Central Sector Scheme (Agricultural Infrastructure Fund), a national/Central scheme, when Section 2(g) of the Act defines 'State-sponsored scheme'.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

As an interim measure, no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the recovery proceedings without leave of the Court.

¶19

Key takeaways

The question whether the Act, 1972 applies to the lending in question was left open: learned standing counsel was directed to obtain instructions on whether the lending was done under a State-sponsored scheme or a joint venture of the Central and State Governments under the Agricultural Infrastructure Fund, learned counsel for the Bank was to have instructions, and the matter was listed on 23.04.2026.obiter¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Ajit Kumar and Indrajeet Shukla, JJ.), interim order in Writ - C No. 12826 of 2026 (Amol Kesarvani v. Union of India and 2 Others): writ petition challenging recovery initiated against the petitioner under the Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 for dues arising from lending under the Central Sector Scheme (Agricultural Infrastructure Fund). Petitioner contended, relying on the definition of 'State-sponsored scheme' in Section 2(g) of the Act, 1972, that recoveries under the Act are confined to lending under State schemes. The Court directed learned standing counsel to obtain instructions on whether the lending was done under a State-sponsored scheme or a joint venture of the Central and State Governments under the Agricultural Infrastructure Fund so as to enable recovery under the Act, 1972/U.P. Agricultural Credit Act, 1973, and directed learned counsel for the Bank to have instructions. As an interim measure, the Court ordered that no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the recovery without leave of the Court, and listed the matter on 23.04.2026.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 12826 of 2026

Amol Kesarvani

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union Of India And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Mishra, Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Ramesh Kumar Shukla

¶9

Court No. - 1

¶10

HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.

¶11

Heard Mr. Arun Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Kirti Sharma holding brief of Mr. Ramesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the Bank and Mr. G.P. Yadav, learned standing counsel for the State.

¶12

The basic argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner is, the recovery under the Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 (in short 'Act, 1972') could not have been initiated against the petitioner for lending under the National Scheme known as Central Sector Scheme under the Agricultural Infrastructure Fund. According to him, under the Act, 1972 recoveries can be ensured only in respect of the dues against the lending done under some State Scheme.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the definition clause of State-sponsored scheme given under Section 2(g) of the Act, 1972.

¶14

Learned standing counsel is, accordingly, directed to obtain proper instructions in the matter, on the next date fixed, as to whether the lending has been done to the petitioner under the State-sponsored scheme or otherwise there is a joint venture of Central and State Government under the Agricultural Infrastructure Fund to enable recovery of dues under the Act, 1972/U.P. Agricultural Credit Act, 1973.

¶15