R. Prabhakar v. 1. A.P State Financial Corporation

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction declaring the action of the respondents in issuing notice vide Ref No.AFCMGL/72857001120251151, dated 01'07-2O2S,Withoutgiving any oppartunity of hearing as illegal arbitrary and viola of Article 14 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently dir the respondents consider the representation dated 23-07 -202 and direct the Respondents to grant the opportunity of he and direct the Respondent authority lo give some time for the 0 payment to the State Finance Corporation, and further direct th Respondents not to interfere with the M/s.Sri Venkateshwara Bin Rice Mill,Sy.No.833/B,H.No.1- g0,Chelpur Village, Mulugu Ghanp Mandal,Jayashankar Bhupalpally District, and pass pendin disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the representation dated. 25-07 -2025 and /,/ direct the Respondents to grant the oppartunity of hea ing and direct the Respondents to extend the time, pending disposal of the ra't t Petition and in the interest of Justice and equity. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. SHARAT CHANDRA A Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI M. HAMSA RAJ (SC FOF APSFC) The Court made the following: ORDER .r/ THE HON'BLE SRT JIISTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI{A ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing notice vide Ref.No.AFC/WGL/72857OOL/2025/151, dated O1.O7.2O25, without granting an opportunity of hearing, as arbitrar5r, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice, and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.07 .2025 and grant further time for payment of the balance amount under the One-Time Settlement (OTS) scheme.

2. Heard Sri A. Sharat Chandra, Iearned counsel for the petitioner ald Sri M. Hamsa Raj, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation (APSFC). Perused the record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, a proprietor of M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Biny Rice Mill, had availed a term loan*6rf Rs.6O,OO,OOO/- from APSFC for establishing a rice mill. The petitioner defaulted in repayment, and the account was 2 declared as Non-Performing Asset (NpA) on 30.(rr outstanding as on 3L.O8.2O24 is The petitioner, in view of his financial diffrculti<:r It One-Time Settlement (OTS) with the respondent of Rs.83,69 ,606 / -, payable on or before ll .2014. The ioan ;.3,11,26,765 / -. , entered into a for an amount ..o3.2022. The petitioner, however, failed to comply with the O! S schedule and paid only Rs.23.25 lakhs in total .as of 13.11.2o

14. Due to non- payment, the OTS was cancelled on lO.Ll.2O2i>. and a demand notice under Section 29 of the State Financial o rrporations Act, 195 1, u,as issued on O3.O9.2024. Ttre petitiorLr r filed W.P.No. 16239 of 2025 seeking extension of time to mal e the said OTS pavment and this Court, by order dated 25.06.2,) 25, directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's reprt:r entation dated

25.04.2025. Pursualt to that order, the responrl :nts granted 30 days'time to the petitioner to pay tJle said OTS ar Lount, who norv seeks further extension of six months uia repr,: rentation dated

23.07.2025. The Petitioner, now, seeks a dir,: :tion from this court to the respondents to grant a further exten s on of 6 months time for payment of the said OTS amount. 3 I

4. The respondents, in their counter, stated that the petitioner has been given multiple opportunities since 2O2O to setfle the dues, including under the OTS scheme. The petitioner failed to pay even the revised OTS amounts within the granted periods, and therefore, no further relief should be granted.

5. However, learned counsel for tl:e petitioner, during the course of hearing, submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to \ pay the entire OTS amount within a period of 3 months from today, in installments. l I

6. [n view of the submissions made, and in the interest of justice, this Court is inclined to grant one last opportunity to the petitioner to make good the pa5rment, with certain conditions. 7 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions i) The petitioner shall pay the balance OTS amount to the respondents through installments within a period of three months from today. ii) Until the expiry of the time granted above, the 4 respondents are restrained frc n taking any coercive steps against the petitione :. iii) In case of default in pa5rment of any single installment by thc petitioner, the 'espondents are at liberty to proceed against 1l e petitioner 1n accordance rvith law. Pending miscellanecus applications, if rr ry, shall stand closed. No costs Stl Tst itPx,Htul?JYtxx //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER ' i fftrgr*+ffiuffi**ffifllsi * :** CHR PMK r i I t i1 l i I ,t I : ! i I i I I I I i t ! t I I HIGH COURT DATED:01 10912025 t $ ORDER W.P.No.23801 of 2025 1-" '- ( c\. 22 i:, 28fr C) t) ,2 o L., - !'.1r.- . :,\' :7 '':..- - - -;-"t-- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS