3.The petitioner is an agriculturist and cultivating sugarcane crops in his lands as well as took lease to some extent of lands. On the basis of agricultural crops loan recommendation made by the Sugar Mill, the fifth respondent sanctioned loan for the purpose of drip irrigation. According to the petitioner, the said loan was sanctioned during the year 2008, but the Sugar Mill has issued cutting orders for one acre of the cultivated sugarcane crops only after lapse of 18 months from cutting period. Hence, the petitioner met with heavy loss for more than Rs.30 lakhs. He made representation to the respondents on 18.01.2016 to extend the benefits of agricultural debt waiver and debt relief scheme, 2008 and waive the entire arrears. He has also filed Writ Petition in W.P.No.6598 of 2016 before this Court to waive the agricultural loan amount and this Court directed the fourth respondent herein to dispose of the petitioner's representation, after giving an opportunity of hearing to him. Thereafter, the petitioner filed representation dated 28.07.2016 to the respondents. On 12.09.2016, the fourth respondent rejected the petitioner's representation and directed him to repay the entire loan amount. The petitioner has got no other alternative except to approach this Court seeking to quash the impugned order dated 12.09.2016 and hence, the Writ Petition has been filed.
