IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15118 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.09.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Mohan Lal ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Seema Azad Rai, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent-State. Mr. Parmod Singh Thakur, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Notice. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Parmod Singh Thakur, Advocate, appear and accept service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and respondents No. 2 to 4, respectively. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner is that his father had obtained loan of Rs.2,00,000/- from the respondents-Bank in the year 2011 under the Kisaan Credit Card (KCC) Scheme, out of which sum of Rs.45,000/- stands repaid. It has been averred in the petition that on account of financial constraints, father of the petitioner was unable to repay the loan, as a result thereof, petitioner, who is guarantor, has been issued notice of recovery (Annexure P-1). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner represented to the respondents-Bank on 10.08.2025 (Annexure P-5) for settling his loan under One Time Settlement Scheme, 2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that since One Time Settlement Scheme is still in force, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case respondents-Bank is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner under One Time Settlement Scheme. 4. Mr. Parmod Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank, states that though OTS Scheme is not applicable in the case of the petitioner, but yet respondents-Bank will examine the representation of the petitioner and take action in accordance with the scheme. 3. Consequently, in view of fair stand adopted by learned counsel for the respondents-Bank, this Court, without going into merits of the case as well as question of maintainability of the writ petition, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents-Bank to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-5) under One time Settlement Scheme within two months from today. Ordered accordingly. Till the time representation, as detailed hereinabove, is not decided by the 2 competent authority, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to notice dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P-1). Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. September 19, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3