GURUSHARAN SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner -unit is registered as a small scale industry and is engaged in manufacturing Auto Head Lamps, Reflectors, Mirrors and Vacuum quoted items. It obtained a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/ - in the year 1978 from the respondent -Bihar State Financial Corporation (hereinafter to be referred to as the Corporation), but failed to repay the same and thus the loan dues accumulated to Rs. 4.97 lakhs. However, a fresh loan of Rs. 5.50 lakhs was sanctioned to the petitioner - unit for its rehabilitation on concessional rate, out of which Rs. 4.97 lakhs were disbursed. The petitioner unit approached the Corporation for further loan against subsidy and a sum of Rs. 35,000/ - was sanctioned in the year 1988 as ad interim assistance to the unit.
(2.) IN the year 1991, an application was made to the Managing Director of Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority for registration of the petitioner unit as sick industry. Managing Director of the said Authority forwarded the same to the Director of Industries, Bihar. In the meantime, the Corporation issued notice dated 31.10.1990 to the petitioner unit for payment of the term loan, on which the petitioner filed a representation (Annexure 6) on 24.3.1991 before the Senior Branch Manager of the Corporation at Adityapur, respondent No. 2 for rehabilitation of the unit. At that time, the instalment amount of Rs. 10,000/ - per month was being deposited. On 12.3.1992, the Corporation published advertisement in Patna Newspaper New Bharat Times inviting tenders for auction sale of the petitioner -unit along with other Companies. The petitioner filed CWJC No. 992 of 1992 (R) which was permitted to be withdrawn on 13.5.1992 (Annexure 7) to approach the Senior Branch Manager of the Corporation. The petitioner again filed CWJC No. 604 of 1993 (R) for rehabilitation of the unit according to the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India, which was disposed of on 11.2.1993 (Annexure 8) with a direction that if no step has been taken by now pursuant to the earlier direction of the Court dated 13.5.1992 (Annexure 7), then Corporation was directed to proceed with rehabilitation of the petitioner -unit, according to the Circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India (Annexure 11) and the Corporation (Annexure 10).
(3.) ON 27.9.1993 the Managing Director of the Corporation passed orders (Annexure 14) on the rehabilitation proposal and rejected the same on the ground that the loan was first disbursed to the petitioner -unit in the year 1978, and thereafter twice re -schedulement of dues have already taken place. The Circular of the Industrial Development Bank of India dated 9.10.1989 envisaged that total outstanding dues should be repaid within a span of twenty years from the date of first disbursement. The petitioners claim of increase of turnover per annum was unrealistic and unsustainable. The Managing Director also observed that even if the alleged increase in turnover is taken to be expected accruals it would not be sufficient to liquidate the Corporations dues in the remaining period of five years to bring within the span of twenty years under the guidelines of the Industrial Development Bank of India. Hence, the rehabilitation proposal of the petitioner -unit was unacceptable as per the Reserve Bank of India guidelines.;