1 901 WP 9689-21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 WRIT PETITION NO. 9689 OF 2010 DWARWA UPSA JAL SINCHAN CO OP SOCIETY DHARWA WADI THROUGH CHAIRMAN VERSUS THE STTE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Mr. Bhumkar R. P., Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. P. S. Patil, Add.GP for Respondent-State Mr. Shingare K. F., Advocate for Respondent No.5 Mr. Suryawanshi Kamlakar J., Advocate for Respondent No.2 …. CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT AND SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ. DATED : 03/04/2025. P. C. : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner – Society has filed the present writ petition for the following main reliefs. C) That the impugned notice / auction letter dated 18/05/2010 issued by the respondent authority respondent No.5 may kindly be quashed and set aside by issuing appropriate writ or direction against the respondents. D) That the respondents No.1 to 5 may kindly be directed to consider the claim of the petitioner agricultural Co-operative society members for granting the benefits of exemption of Rs.20,000/- each under the scheme of Debts relief dated 06/01/2009 and that all the agricultural members of the society may be held eligibe for the benefits of 2025:BHC-AUG:10003-DB 2 901 WP 9689-21 the scheme by isuing appropriate writ against the respondents. 3. The petitioner wants to have benefit of the loan waiver scheme introduced vide GR dated 06/01/2009. Initially, it was held by this court that the scheme was not applicable to the petitioner - Society. A review application was preferred. The same has been allowed holding the scheme to have been applicable. Thus, we cannot go in to that question. Clause-2 of the scheme reads thus : “2- dsanz ‘kklukP;k d`”kh dtZekQh o dtZ ijrQsM loyr ;kstuk 2008 varxZr ts ‘ksrdjh oafpr jkghysys vkgsr] R;kauk :-20]000@& ojhy Fkdhr fdaok ijrQsM dsysY;k fu;fer fdaok Fkdhr vYi] e/;e o nh?kZ eqnr d`”kh dtZ vlysY;k loZ ‘ksrd&;kauk R;kauh R;kaP;kdMhy moZjhr jDde 30 twu 2009 Ik;Zar HkjY;kuarj :- 20]000@& i;Zar dtZ ekQh fdaok dtZ ijrQsM loyr ns.;kl eatwjh ns.;kr ;sr vkgs-” 4. From the aforesaid clause, the farmers or the society, who want to avail the benefit, ought to have repaid the loan amount or at least the principal amount by 30/06/2009. There is nothing on record in terms of government document to indicate the scheme has been extended beyond 30 June 2009. Period was extended. The record indicates that all the members of the petitioner - Society constitute one unit (joint family) and application was preferred. The respondent - Bank initiated proceeding for recovery of the outstanding amount. When it issued a notice for attachment and sale of the agricultural land, the petitioner - Society rushed to the court. Be that as it may, since deadline 30/06/2009 has not been adhered to by the petitioner - Society and 3 901 WP 9689-21 application dated 15/02/2009 was adverted to suggest that the petitioner asked the Bank to grant it the relief, whereas the condition under the GR was to repay the amount, the petitioner – society could have directly repaid the amount in its loan account instead of asking the benefit. It is reiterated that all the members of the petitioner - Society are the members of one Hindu joint family. It has not repaid the loan amount by 30/06/2009 in our view therefore, the petitioner - Society is not entitled for the benefit of the GR. The amount which has been deposited under protest, be appropriated towards the amount due from the petitioner - Society. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. ) (R. G. AVACHAT, J.) VS Maind/-