( 1 ) THROUGH these various writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the right of the opposite party Banks to realise the amount of loan taken by the petitioners, as arrears of land revenue under the provisions of Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act. 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Recovery of Dues Act only), and have prayed for quashing the Citation, issued by the opposite party district authorities. Since the controversy involved in all these writ petitions is the same, hence all the writ petitions are disposed of together.

( 2 ) WE have heard S. /shri Ranjit Saxena, Rajendra Kumar Mishra. N. S. Chahar. Ashok Bhushan, ran Vijai Singh, P. N. Mishra and S. N. Srivastava. learned counsel for the petitioners, and s. /shri Sharad Verma, V. K. Goel. Ajai, Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Sachin Mohan, K. L. Grover. Ashish Bhattacharya, S. P. Srivastava and the Chief Standing Counsel, learned counsel for the respondents.

( 3 ) IN Writ Petition No. 953 of 1997. M/s. Anupam Sari Centre borrowed loan from the respondent Central Bank of India under Cash Credit Facility. The loan borrowed by the petitioner. the petitioner contends, is a com