The court affirmed eligibility for a subsidy under the scheme for livestock purchased before its closure, emphasizing compliance with scheme regulations.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

2 08-12-2025 1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for a direction to the respondents more particularly to respondent no. 6 - District Comprehensive Cow Development Office, Sasaram to release the subsidy amount to the concerned Bank in the loan account of the petitioner in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Cow Development Scheme . It has further been prayed that the respondent – Bank be directed to deduct the sanctioned subsidy amount from the total loan liability and thereafter recalculate the outstanding amount payable by the petitioner.

3. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ application is that the petitioner applied for the loan under the scheme for dairy farming in the Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank, Shivsagar Branch for Rs. 5 Lakh. After verification of the documents and other things the petitioner was found eligible for the loan and accordingly the Bank sanctioned loan of Rs. 5 Lakh to the petitioner. The District Animal Husbandry Officer, Rohtas issued a letter bearing no. 341 dated 07.10.2013 to the Regional Officer, Gramin Bank, Sasaram. The District Animal Husbandry Officer, Rohtas forwarded the loan details and the application form of the petitioner to the Branch Manager for necessary action. After verification of all credentials and completion of formality loan amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was sanctioned and approved in favour of the petitioner. The Branch Manager of the Gramin Bank issued a letter dated 10.03.2015 bearing no. 233 / 2014-15 to the District Dairy Development Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram regarding the purchase of milk yielding (milch) animals by the beneficiaries under the Intensive Dairy Development Programme scheme. The letter also included or referred to a list of selected beneficiaries in which the name of the petitioner was duly mentioned for the purchase of milch animals under the said scheme. Thereafter the petitioner purchased a total of ten milch cows from two different animal fairs on two separate occasions. On 19.03.2015 he purchased five cows from one Gani Miya at the animal fair held at Thanua, Rohtas, Sasaram. Subsequently, on 19.07.2016 the petitioner purchased another five cows from one Dhirendra Kumar for Rs. 35,000/- each at Keshav Virat Animal Fair held at Baraun in the district of Aurangabad.

4. Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as per scheme of grant of subsidy dated 24.05.2013 annexed at Annexure -P/2 the petitioner was entitled for an amount equivalent to 50% of the value of the cows purchased as subsidy. The petitioner purchased the cows worth about Rs. 3.50 lakh as such he is entitled for the subsidy amount of 50% for the value of the cows. The Branch Manager of Shivsagar Branch, Rohtas issued a letter bearing no. 252 / 2014-15 dated 26.03.2015 to the District Animal Husbandry Officer, Rohtas regarding submission of the petitioner’s claim form for release of the capital grant under Comprehensive Cow Development Scheme . Under the said scheme financial assistance was sanctioned in favour of the petitioner for establishment of a unit comprising ten milch cows. The petitioner duly submitted his claim voucher before the District Comprehensive Cow Development Office, Sasaram seeking release of the capital grant under the Comprehensive Cow Development Scheme . The petitioner prayed that a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- be sanctioned and disbursed as capital subsidy in his favour. He further submits that Branch Manager of the Shivsagar Branch vide his letter dated 18.07.2016 bearing no. 77/2016 requisitioned the District Animal Husbandry Officer, Rohtas regarding the resubmission of the claim voucher for release of the subsidy or capital grant in favour of the petitioner under the Comprehensive Cow Development Scheme . When the subsidy amount was not paid to the petitioner, he filed a detailed representation before the authorit