IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13407 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ M/s Snow Dew Hydro Electric Power Project Pvt. Ltd. …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Sate Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file representation to the Managing Director of the respondent-Bank for redressal of its grievance with regard to settlement of loan under One Time Settlement Scheme. 2. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, learned Senior Counsel representing the respondent-Bank, states that pursuant to order passed by this Court in earlier writ petition, respondents have already considered the representation, thereby offering One Time Settlement Scheme for sum of 56 crores, which petitioner has not been able to deposit till date. ₹ 3. Mr. Rahul Mahajan, learned counsel representing the petitioner, states that since amount, agreed under OTS, has varied from 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 time to time and while deciding the earlier representation filed by the petitioner, respondent-Bank failed to take note of prudential norms of income recognition & asset classification (Annexure P-35), direction can be issued to the respondent-Bank to consider the case of the petitioner afresh. 4. Though this Court is of the definite view that present petition is not maintainable before this Court, but having taken note of the fact that petitioner is ready and willing to repay the amount under One Time Settlement Scheme and respondent-Bank, pursuant to direction passed by this Court, has also agreed to settle the dispute under afore Scheme, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation to the respondent-Bank within a period of one week, which in-turn shall be decided by the respondent- Bank, within a period of two weeks thereafter, taking note of prudential norms of income recognition & asset classification (Annexure P-35) as well as OTS Policy of the respondent-Bank (Annexure P-8). Ordered accordingly. The present petition is disposed in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 27, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)