SRI BIJOY KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Non-release of subsidy amount to the Complainant’s loan-Account are the allegations arrayed against Ops.
2. Briefly narrating, Complainant under P.D.E.(Promotion of Dairy entrepreneur) Scheme availed a dairy loan for the year FY2013-14 being sponsored by Addl. Veterinary Surgeon, Derabish (OpNo.2). The Project cost of the loan was Rs. 1 lakh, where as per the scheme 25% subsidy is given to the loanee/beneficiary under the said scheme. It is alleged that inspite of several request, Op No.1-Bank is not collecting the subsidy amount from Op No.2 and equally not crediting or adjusting the same subsidy in Complainant’s loan account, for which complainant is sustaining financial loss and mental agony. The inaction of the Op No.1-Bank on non-adjustment of subsidy amount treated as deficiency in service of the Op Bank. The cause of action of the case arose on dtd. 23.10.2017, when the Op No.1 after receive of the written complaint did not take any step for crediting of subsidy amount in complainant’s loan account. The Complaint is filed with prayer that a direction may be given to Op No.1 to obtain subsidy amount of Rs. 25,000/- from OpNo.2 and same to be adjusted in Complainant’s loan account and further prayed for compensation to be paid by Op No.1 Bank alongwith Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation.
3. Notice was served to Punjab National Bank, Chatrachakada Branch (OP No.1) by Regd. Post with A.D. through this Forum and the track consignment filed into the dispute reveals that Notice has been delivered to Op-Bank on dt. 20.04.2018. But Op-Bank did not prefer to appear into the dispute and set ex-parte vide this Forum’s order No.7 dtd. 26.06.2018.
OP No.2, the Addl. Veterinary Surgeon, V.D. Derabish appeared into the dispute and filed written statement to defend their case. It is averred that under P.D.E. (Promotion of Diary Entrepreneur) for F-Y 2013-14, Complainant availed a loan to the tune of Rs. 1 Lakh and Op-Bank disbursed the amount to the Complainant. It is also stated that under the P.D.E scheme there is provision of 25% Govt. subsidy on total Project cost for General category of farmer and 33.3% for SC/ST category of farmer and in the long term interest subvention scheme, there is 3% interest subvention provided by the State Govt.,which will be calculated from the date of disbursement of loan upto the date of actual repayment of loan by dairy farmer, an additional 2% interest will be made for prompt repayment of loan installments on due time. Denying the allegations of the Complainant, Op No.2 averred that they have no role to play in release of subsidy amount to the Complainant, and the State Govt. has deposited the whole budgeted subsidy and interest subvention amount for F-Y 2013-14 to the State Level Bankers Committee (SLBC), UCO Bank, Circle Office, Bhubaneswar and not to the Op No.2. Further, OpNo.2 in details describes the procedure of receive of subsidy amount from SLBC by the sanctioning Bank.
4. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and case of the Op No.2 on merit as non-appears on behalf of Op No.2 in the date of hearing also ex-parte hearing against Op-Bank. The facts appear from the Complaint and written statement of OpNo.2 that an amount of Rs. 1 Lakh was sanctioned as loan to the Complainant to establish a Dairy Unit under P.D.E. scheme sponsored by Govt. of Odisha for F-Y 2013-14. The Dairy Unit of Complainant was financed by Op-Bank. It is also a fact that under the said scheme loanee is entitled to availed a subsidy of 25% of the Project cost or loan amount sanctioned alongwith extra percentage of subsidies , are paid to the complainant, if the loan are repaid in due time.
The Complaint lies before this Forum on allegations of non-release of subsidy amount on Complainant’s loan account for which complainant sustained financial loss and mental agony. In these allegations, OpNo.2, Addl. Veterinary Surgeon, Derabish, sponsorer of the scheme clarified the procedure of release of subsidy amount and other financial benefits to the loanee under P.D.E. Scheme. It is stated that, under the P.D.E. scheme the State Govt. of Odisha releases the subsidy amount of beneficiaries to State Level Bankers Committee and UCO-Bank, Bhubaneswar is the SLBC for F-Y 2013-14 and the sanctioning Bank will apply in proper format to the SLBC for release of subsidy amount and credited/adjusted the same on the Complainant’s loan account. It is also submitted by Op No.2 that, State Govt. of Odisha has deposited the whole budgeted subsidy amount for F-Y 2013-14to the SLBC, UCO Bank Circle Office, Bhubaneswar. In the dispute the reason of non-release of subsidy amount to Complainant’s loan Account is not ascertained due to non-appearance of the Op-Bank and it is equally in dark whether Op-Bank had initiated any process as per the norms to avail the subsidy from SLBC.We rely on a letter bearing No. 22006(30) dtd. 20.11.2013 of Director, Animal Husbandry & VETERINARY Services address to all C.D.V.O’s of the state with copy to Bankers, where in it is directed that all the Banker’s concerned will claim subsidy to SLBC, UCO Bank, Bhubaneswar with a date line of 10.01.2014. Hence, it is crystal clear that Op-Bank by not crediting the subsidy amount has deprived the Complainant-loanee to avail the financial benefits and OP-Bank is responsible and Accountable for not availing the subsidy amount of loanee for SLBC.
In our considered view, On the facts and circumstances of the case OpNo.1 Bank is deficient in service by not crediting or adjusting the subsidy amount in Complainant’s like loanee must sustain financial loss and mental agony. Simultaneously, it is not disclosed that on non-adjustment of subsidy and its related benefits whether Op-Bank has charged any interest in the loan amount or not? Because Complainant being a beneficiary of the scheme deserves financial benefits in way of subsidy which is provided by the Govt. of Odisha for promotion of the Dairy Project to its entrepreneur. So, the Op-Bank shall not charge any interest on the loan amount without considering the subsidy release date. Further, the Op No.2 has no role to play in release of subsidy amount, accordingly OpNo.2 is freed from the allegation of deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainant.
Having observations reflected above, it is directed that Op-Bank will take necessary steps to credit/adjust the subsidy and its related benefits amount in Complainant’s loan Account, if not credited/ adjusted earlier. The Op- Bank is also directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation. The order is to be carried out within 3 months of receipt of this order, failing which action will be initiated against Op-Bank as per the Provisions of C.P.Act. 1986.
The Complaint is allowed inpart with cost against Op No.1 Bank on ex-parte.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 7th September,2018.
I,agree.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
