IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14442 of 2026 Decided on: 21st August, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paramajeet Kaur …..Petitioner Versus The Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Limited and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Dr. Rajesh Kumar Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sohan Singh Rathore, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 3. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Sohan Singh Rathore, learned counsel and Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and respondent No.4, respectively. 2. Petitioner seeks direction to respondents No.1 to 3-Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Limited to consider her case for one time settlement in respect of Loan Account 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Nos.50062948790 and 50067011184. The case set up by the petitioner is that she belongs to the poor strata of the society, is illiterate and economically distressed woman aged about 69 years. Petitioner’s son availed home loan facility from the respondent-Bank Branch at Ajouli, District Una in the sum of Rs.3 Lakhs on 16.02.2016. Another loan facility of Rs.2 Lakh was sanctioned in her favour by the respondents on 07.11.2017. The aforesaid two loan facilities were availed by the petitioner for meeting genuine financial requirements of her family. However, petitioner’s son, who was the only earning member of the family, passed away on 16.02.2023, leaving behind his wife and minor son. That after the death of the sole earning member, there is no earning member left in petitioner’s family. Petitioner seeks direction to the respondents to consider her case for settlement of the aforesaid two loan accounts under the applicable One Time Settlement Scheme, Compromise Settlement Scheme, Compassionate Settlement Mechanism or any other policy. 3. Keeping in view the grievance raised in the writ petition as also the facts and circumstances pointed out, it is deemed appropriate to permit the petitioner to represent to respondent No.1/competent authority for settling her 3 loan accounts under the applicable One Time Settlement Scheme, Compromise Settlement Scheme, Compassionate Settlement Mechanism or any other policy. Ordered accordingly. In case such a representation is so made by the petitioner within a week from today, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and applicable policies/ schemes/instructions, if any, within three weeks thereafter, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. Till such time, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. It is, however, made clear that in case no such representation is made within the aforesaid period, the limited protection granted to the petitioner shall stand automatically vacated. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 21, 2026 Judge Mukesh