Modala Mallesh v. K. Subramanyam

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN REVIEW APPLICATION NO,O,I OF 2023 lN WRIT PETIT|ON NO.270s4 0F 2015 AND CONTEMPT CASE NO.1693 OF 2o23 REVIEW APPLICATION NO.O1 OF 2023 IN W.P.NO.27054 0F 2015 Between:

Union Bank of lndia, Miryalaguda 3-Branch, Erstwhile Andhra Bank, Ashok Nagar Branch, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District, represented by its Branch Manager. ,..PETITIONER AND

1. Modala Mallesh, S/o Venkaiah, Aged about 31 years, resident of D.No.7157212, Bagatugadda, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District

2. Modala Swathi W/o Mallesh, Agea about 27 years, resident of D.No.71 57 212, Bangarugadda, tvlirya laguda, Nalgonda District. ...RESPONDENT No.1 &2/PETITIONERS

3. The District Collector, Nalgonda District at Nalgonda District.

4. The Joint Director of Aqriculture, Prakasam Bazaar, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District

5. The Tahsildar, Anumala Mandal, Nalgonda District.

6. The State of Telangana, represented by its, Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture And Cooperation (Agr-ll) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENT Nos.3 to 6/ RESPONDENT NOs.2 to 5 in W.P Petition filed under Section 15'1 of C.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to modify/clarify the orders d1.27 -O9-2O22 in W.P.No.27054 of 2015, in the interest of justice.

wRtT PET|T|ON NO.27054 0F 2015 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cou( may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not waiving agricultural crop loan in Account No.78730100028748 of the petitioner in terms of the loan waiver documenUorder dated 30-09-2014 issued under agricultural loan waiver scheme-2014 by the Government of Telangana and issuing the registered notice dated 07-08-2015 by the ls respondent Bank proposing to auction the gold articles kept as security against the said loan as the same is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the G.O.Rt.No.69 dated 13-08-2014 issued by the Government and consequently direct the respondent '1 to withdraw the auction notice dated 07-08-2015 as also all the respondents to implement loan waiver Scheme in respect of agricultural crop loan in Account No.78730100028748. C.C NO: 1693 OF 2023 Between:

1. Modala Mallesh, Sio Venkaiah, Age. 32 years, presently H.No. 28-1062, Vidyanagar, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District. ( Previously residing at D No. 7157212, Bangarugadda, Miryalaguda Nalgonda District

2. Modala Swathi, W/o Mallesh, Age. 28 years, presently H.No. 2B-1062, Vidyanagar, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District. ( Previously residing at D No. 71 57 21 2, Bangarugadda, Miryalaguda Nalgonda District ...PETITIONERS AND K. Subramanyam, Branch Manager , Union Bank of lndia, Blue Whale Palace, Reddy Colony, Miryalaguda Branch-3, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District 508207 ...CONTEMNORS Petition under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to punish the respondent herein for the Contempt of this Honble Court for violating the order dated 27.09.2022 in \NP No. 2705412O15 deliberately and willfully.

Counsel for the Review Petitioner/ Respondent No.1 in W.P.No.27054 ot 2015 : SMT V. DYUMANI, (SC FOR UBI) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mrit Petitioners : SRI. PASHAM RAVINDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3to6/ Respondent Nos.2to5 in W.P.No.27054 of 2015 : Smt.A.SUNITHA, ASST. G.P FOR THE ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K. LAKSHMAN REVIEW APPLICATION NO.OI OF 2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO.27054 0F 2015 AND CONTEMPT CASE NO.1693 0F 20.23 COMMON ORDER:

Heard Smt.V. D5rumani, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner / respondent No.1 in W.P.No.27054 of 2015, Sri Pasham Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.7 and 2 I writ petitioners and Smt.A. Sunitha, Iearned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Additional Advocate General for respondent Nos.3 to 6 / respondent Nos.2 to 5 in W.P.No.27054 of 2015.

2. This review application is hled to modify / clarify the order dated 27-O9-2O22 in W.P.No.27O54 of 2015. Vide aforesaid order this Court allowed the said Writ Petition and directed respondent No.1 therein / rerriew petitioner to refund the amount of Rs.1,47,835/- along w'ith interest to the writ petitioners within four (4) weeks from the date

;* of receipt of a copy of the said order. Review petitioner is seeking review of the said order on the followrng grounds: i. Review petitioner bank is only intermediary' ii. Scheme is formulated by the State Government' iii. Scheme is limited only for Rs'1,OO,OO0/-' Therefore, without concurrence of respondent Nos'2 to 6 herein, who framed the scheme, review petitioner herein cannot refund the aforesaid amount'

3. Whereas Sri Pasham Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel appearing for rcspondent Nos.1 and 2 / *tit petitioners would submit that the review petitioner herein may be directed to refund the a-foresaid amount and claim the said amount from respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein'

4. Smt.A. Sunitha, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Additional Advocate General for respondent Nos.3 to 6 I respondent Nos'2 to 5 in W.P.No.27O54 of 2Ol5 would submit that the scheme is formulated by the State Government and guidelines were issued vide G.O.Rt.No.69 dated 13-08-2OI4' As per the

J said guide lines review petitioner herein is only intermediary, therefore, concurrence is required for review petitioner to refund the said amount.

\ \

5. In the light of the aforesaid submissions and also I considering the guidelines issued by respondent No.5 in W.P.No.27054 of 2OL5, Review Application No.01 of 2023 is ordered and order dated2T-O9-2O22 in W.p.No.2TOS4 of 2015 is modified and review petitioner herein is directed to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,47,935/- along with interest to the writ petitioners within three (3) weeks from the datc of rcceipt of a copy of this order in concurrence with respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein / respondent Nos.2 to 5 in W.P.No.27054 of 20 l5 in terms of guidelines issued by respondent No.5 in W.p.No.27054 of 2OLS vide G.O.Rt.No.69 dated 13-08-2014.

6. Contempt Case No.1693 of 2023 is closed gralting Iiberty to the petitioners to file fresh Contempt Case. There shall be no order as to costs.

,"'.,

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

SD/- K.SHYL HI DEPUTY REGIS I //TRUE COPY// SECTION ICER tf' ,n" Branch ltilanag \;Irffi " lvot"*o tSBlo' tooo"'ation' High court for the state of relangana at ;. BXl"tt?SJHUIJ 'ru"ni'

sc FoR uBr toPUCl 11.Two CD CoPies'

BSK

HIGH COURT DATED: 2911212023 CC TODAY 1HE si4 14:

Jo (\ }., I COMMON ORDER 0;l !.1;

* t) .l REVIEW APPLICATION NO.O1 OF 2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO.27054 OF 2015 AND CONTEMPT CASE NO.1693 OF 2023 ORDERING THE REVIEW APPLICATION NO.O1 OF 2023IN WRIT PETITION NO.27054 OF 2015 AND CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE NO.1693 OF 2023 WITHOUT COSTS @ fl"\