Ravi S.Dhavan, V.P.Goel, JJ. - (1.) -This matter has been pending in the court for ten years. Though learned Counsel for the petitioner is dead, the matter cannot be adjourned so that it remains pending beyond the period of ten years as this in itself reflects badly on a public justice system.
(2.) As the matter is one a writ jurisdiction and the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari, though in effect a writ of mandamus only has been sought, upon examining the record, the Court is rendering its opinion.
(3.) In effect the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the action of respondent No. 3 the U.P. Financial Corporation, Kanpur, for proceeding under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. But the main issue which has been presented in the writ petition is that the respondents No. 1 and 2 U.P. State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Lucknow and the District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Bareilly are not exceeding the cash credit limit of the petitioner by making available the petitioner's loan so that in effect the recovery proceedings can be taken care of.;