AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
,,
Nilu Agrawal, J",,
These intra-court appeals, L.P.A. No. 1973 of 2016 and L.P.A. No. 1974 of 2016 filed by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural",,
Development (for short the „NABARD‟) and L.P.A. No. 2294 of 2016 filed by the Union of India are against the order passed in C.W.J.C. No.,,
12000 of 2013 filed by the Multi State Cooperative Land Development Bank Ltd.(for short “the Bankâ€) and C.W.J.C. No. 9020 of 2013 preferred,,
by the farmers (beneficiaries), which was heard and disposed of by a common order dated 11.05.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge.",,
For the sake of convenience L.P.A. No. 2294 of 2016 is being taken up as a leading case as all the three appeals arise out of common order.,,
C.W.J.C. No. 12000 of 2013 was filed by the Bank and C.W.J.C. No. 9020 of 2013 was filed by the farmers(beneficiaries). The facts emerging,,
from the writ application is that the Central Government in the year 2008 announced a loan waiver scheme,,
“Agriculture Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008†(hereinafter referred to as “Schemeâ€), which was later notified by the Central",,
Government in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Government of India, New Delhi. The NABARD was appointed as nodal",,
agency for the implementation of the Scheme through the Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and the Cooperative Banks like the Bank of the writ,,
petitioner. The marginal farmers, small farmers and other farmers, as defined in the Scheme, were to get the benefit(s) of the said Scheme which was",,
made applicable to the loans disbursed between 31.03.1997 to 31.03.2007. Clause 4(3) of the Scheme read as under:,,
“4.3 Nothing contained in this Scheme shall apply to any loan disbursed by a lending institution prior to March 31, 1997.â€",,
However, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Government of India vide letter dated 28.05.2008, which was communicated by",,
the Nodal Agency (NABARD) by letter dated 03.06.2008 giving certain supplementary instructions of explanatory nature to the implementing,,
agencies for carrying out the Schemes, which is reproduced hereinbelow:",,
“This circular contains certain supplementary instructions of an explanatory nature implementing agencies will find these instructions,,
useful to address doubts which may be raised by field level functionaries:-,,
(i) Only those direct agricultural loans which fulfill all the three conditions, i.e. (a) disbursed between March 31, 1997 and March 31,",,
2007,",,
(b) overdue on December 31, 2007, and (c) remaining unpaid until February 29, 2008 will be eligible for debt waiver/ debt relief under the",,
Scheme.,,
(ii) xxxxx,,
(iii) xxxxx,,
(iv) xxxxx,,
However, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Government of India again vide letter dated 18.06.2008 further sent a clarification",,
regarding the said Scheme to the Nodal Agency (NABARD). The relevant part of the clarification is item 20, which is extracted hereinbelow:",,
“20.,"Whether loans disbursed on
31.03.1997 are eligible as the scheme
says prior to 31.03.1997.
While declaring the guidelines for
implementation of the scheme, it is
incorporated as item 4.3 as under:
“Nothing contained in this scheme
shall apply to any loan disbursed by a
lending institution prior to March 31,
1997â€.
GSCB Ltd. has further viewed that
most of the PACS under liquidation
are having overdues on the period
before 31st March, 1997. Problem is
further aggravated by no further
finance by such PACS. These has
put the borrowers of such PACS in a
critical situation that-
(i) They are not able to repay the loan
 (ii) They are not able to renew it as
PACS has stopped financing because
of liquidation proceedings
(iii) They are not able to get other
loan from other banking institution as
they considered as defaulters.
As such it has been requested for
removal of item No. 4.3 of the
ADWDR Scheme 2008, restricting
the loans disbursed before March,
1997 and give the unqualified effect
to the budget speech.","The Scheme does not apply to any
loan disbursed by lending institutions
prior to close of business on
31.03.1997.â€
authorities concerned acting in terms of the statutory provisions, therefore, without any further investigation could not have acted",,
mechanically on the audit report.â€,,
The Central Government had announced a beneficial Scheme for the benefit of marginal, small and other farmers, who were extended agricultural",,
loans against guarantee/mortgage. The farmers did not make any misrepresentation to get the privilege/ benefits, and, loans of those beneficiaries",,
were waived in favour of the applying farmers. The mortgage deeds, documents of those farmers/ beneficiaries were already returned, account was",,
closed. Thereafter raising a demand after nearly 4-5 years would amount to refund of the petty meagre privileges which these beneficiaries received.,,
The NABARD as an instrumentality of the State could not under the garb of clarification or an audit objection raise such demand, which would",,
evidently fall on the beneficiaries, who are poor farmers and even on equity such demand cannot be raised now after a lapse of so many years.",,
The learned Single Judge has committed no error by allowing the writ applications. The appeals preferred by the Union of India and the,,
NABARD are dismissed. No order as to costs.,,