This C.C. is coming before us for hearing; both the parties appeared in person; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Sri. R. Kiran Kumar, Member, FAC President)

This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.       The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is an agriculturist and resident of Palvoncha, Khammam District.  The complainant submitted that, basing on the G.O.Rt. No.69 Agriculture & Cooperation (AGRI.II) Dept. dt. 13-08-2014, scope of the crop loan waiver scheme, short term production loan and crop loans against gold obtained from Commercial Banks, Cooperative Credit Institutions to the farmers in the Telangana State, he is entitled for debt waiver scheme.  The eligible amount for debt waiver would be limited to the amount of loan, which is disbursed and outstanding as of 31-03-2014, or Rs.1,00,000/- per farmer family whichever is lower.  The complainant submitted that he had obtained agricultural gold loan from SBI Palvoncha, which is pending an amount of Rs.90,557/-, but the opposite party failed to taking the above maximum amount into consideration they applied the scheme for the minimum / lower amount of Rs.25,144/- only which is obtained for agricultural crop loan.  The complainant also submitted that on 30-09-2014 the opposite party issued a letter in which it is stated that the complainant has obtained Agricultural loan / Agriculture gold loan, for which he is liable to pay Rs.25,142/- as on 31-08-2014 for which, the Government released Rs.6286 as first phase release and the same is adjusted to the account of  the complainant and the balance amount will be adjusted in three consecutive years in III Phases and the relevant interest also to be adjusted to the loan account by the Government.  The complainant also submitted that according to the debt waiver scheme the farmers are eligible for both agricultural crop loan and agricultural gold loan and limited to the amount of loan, which is disbursed and outstanding as of 31-03-2014 or Rs.1,00,000/- per family, but the opposite party failed to implement the above scheme to his agricultural gold loan for that the complainant submitted so many representations to the opposite party, as the opposite party failed to implement the same as such the complainant approached this Forum.

3.       In support of his case the complainant filed the following documents which are marked as Exhibits A1 to A4.

Ex.A1:-Photocopy of Pattadhar Pass Book.

Ex.A2:-Photocopy of letter, dt.30-09-2014 addressed to the complainant by the opposite party.

Ex.A3:-Photocopy of letter, dt.24-04-2015 addressed to the complainant along with list of agricultural gold loan for crop outstanding particulars of the farmers including the complainant, by the Branch Manager, SBI, Palvoncha, Khammam District.

4.       On receipt of notice, the opposite party filed counter. In their counter the opposite party admitted that the complainant had outstanding loan an amount of Rs.25,142/- in LSCS Bank bearing loan account No.1609 and also agricultural gold loan in SBI Bank, Palvoncha Branch vide account No.003252830477 of Rs.90,577/-.  The opposite party further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.69, dt. 13-08-2014, if a farmer family has multiple accounts but overall outstanding for crop loan is less than Rs.1,00,000/- then their name will not be deleted in case out standing crop loan is more than Rs.1,00,000/-, then the name will be written in the bank where the farmer family first availed crop loan or where the outstanding is higher, the later giving the first priority.  The opposite party further submitted the complainants first loan outstanding is Rs. 25,142/- under agricultural loan is due out of which the got exemption and adjusted the amount of Rs.6,286/- obtained from the Government, adjusted to the loan outstanding balance of Rs.25,142/- for the loan account No.1609 in LICS Bank and the said outstanding loan was waived, the loan obtained from SBI vide account No.003252830477 of Rs.90,577/- under agricultural gold loan was given second priority, as such it was not waived as per the Government policy, there is no fault on the part of the opposite party in waiving the loan and they had acted as per the Government rules G.O.Rt. No.69and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

5.       Along with their counter the opposite party filed the documents which are marked as exhibits B1 to B3.

Ex.B1:-Photocopy of G.O.Rt.No.69, dt. 13-08-2014 issued by Agriculture and cooperation (AGRI.II) Dept.

Ex.B2:-Photocopy of the letter addressed by the Branch Manager, SBI Palvoncha, to the opposite party.

Ex.B3:-Photocopy of the certificate issued by the CEO, LSCS, Palvoncha.

6.       In view of the above submissions, now the point that arose for consideration is,

1)       Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim?

          2)       To what relief?

Point:-                  

          In this case the complainant is an agriculturist, resident of palvoncha, having account in LSCS Palvoncha and SBI, Palvoncha.  According to the complainant he had obtained crop loan and agriculture gold loan for his agricultural necessacity from the above banks and he had outstanding loan amount of Rs.25,142/- in LSCS Bank and Rs.90,577/- in SBI Palvoncha.  As per G.O.Rt. No.69, dt.13-08-2014 submitted by the opposite party, the agriculture sector in Telangana State majority of farmer families are small and marginal.  Agriculture sector in the state is characterized by stagnation, low productivity, free occurrence of droughts and low levels of public and private investments, taking into account the plight of the farmers in the state, the new Government of the state of Telangana has assured the farmers that, as a first step towards elevating there hardship, a scheme will be introduced for the waiver of their outstanding crop loans,   keeping in view, the Government of Telangana has formulated the crop waiver scheme.  According to the above G.O., the scheme will cover short term production loans and crop loans against gold, distributed to farmers in Telangana State by scheduled commercial banks, cooperative credit institutions and regional rural banks, collectively called as the lending institutions.  As per the G.O., the eligible amount for debt waiver would be limited to the amount of loan (together with applicable interest) which is disbursed and outstanding as of 31-03-2014, or Rs.1,00,000/- per farmer family whichever is lower.  According to the complainant the opposite party failed to implement the Crop loan waiver scheme for his outstanding loan amounts as per the guidelines given in the G.O.Rt.No.69, dt. 13-08-2014, if a farmer family has multiple accounts but overall outstanding for crop loan is  more than Rs.1,00,000/-, then the name will be retained in the bank where the farmer family first availed the crop loan or where the outstanding amount is higher, the later being the first priority.  But the opposite party failed to follow the guidelines prescribed in the G.O.Rt.No.69.  for that the complainant has made written representation to the opposite party and requested to settle the same.  The opposite party is under contractual obligation to discharge his duties in accordance with the G.O. issued by the Government  to the beneficiaries, i.e. farmer families and he has no discretionary power in this regard to sanction according to his will and wishes.  This is a welfare scheme of the new Government of the state of Telangana, which assured the farmers, as a first step towards alleviating there hardship.  The opposite party had affected the scheme to some extent to the complainant for the loan outstanding balance of Rs.25,142/- for the loan account No.1609 in LSCS Bank and the same was waived the another loan obtained from SBI Palvoncha vide account No.003252830477 of Rs.90,577/- under agriculture gold loan was not waived, for which the complainant is also eligible, for that the complainant approached the opposite party.  The primary duty of the court while constructing the provisions of such an act is to adopt a constructive approach to the beneficiaries.  The court is likely to take liberal view of the word services to the beneficiaries, it is the legal duty on the part of opposite party to implement the scheme without his discretion and also implement the scheme in total as per the assurance given by the Government. 

          But in this case the opposite party grossly failed to implement the scheme even after lapse of two years, the non-implementation of the scheme within a reasonable time is clearly a case of deficiency in service.  The opposite party as to discharge his duties as contemplated in the guidelines for crop waiver scheme for the farmers of Telangana State, due to his in act the complainant has to forgo his legal right of remedy conferred under the scheme.  The servants of the Government are also the servants of the public and the use of their power must always be subordinate to their duty of service, no law provides protection against it.  The process of consumer protection have to be construed in favour of the consumer to achieve the purpose of enactment, as it is a social benefit oriented legislation.  As per section 14 (1) (b) of consumer protection act, to pay such amount as may be awarded it as a compensation to the consumer for any loss or injury suffered by him due to the negligence of the opposite party.  Which is social welfare legislation.  The Forum under the act is to protect the interest of the beneficiaries and can grant relief on the basis of the facts in the complaint, considering the overall circumstances of the case.  This is a welfare scheme of the new Government of the state of Telangana which envisages crop loan waiver scheme up to Rs.1,00,000/- for the farmers as a first step towards alleviating their hardship.  In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- towards crop loan waiver scheme for the farmers of the Telangana State, the opposite party is directed to implement the same for the loan account No.1609 in LSCS Bank and also to the agricultural gold loan account No.003252830477 of SBI Palvoncha branch, of the complainant and also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and suffering caused to the complainant by the opposite party and Rs.1,000/- towards cost of proceedings.

7.       In the result, the complaint is allowed, complainant is entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- towards crop loan waivers scheme for the farmers of Telangana State as per G.O.Rt.No.69, dt. 13-08-2014 and the opposite party is directed to impliment the same to the loan account No.1609 in LSCS Bank and Agricultural gold loan account No.003252830477 of SBI, Palvoncha branch, and also directed  to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and to pay Rs. 1,000/- towards cost of proceedings, within a period of two months from the date of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute this order under section 25 and 27 of C.P. Act 1986.

           Typed to my dictation, corrected by me and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this the           day of February, 2016.                                                             

                     FAC President              Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED:-

For Complainant:-                                                     For Opposite party:-   

       -None-                                                                           -None-

DOCUMENTS MARKED:-

For Complainant:-                                                     For Opposite party:-   

FAC President               Member

District Consumer Forum, Khammam.