COMMON ORDER:

Heard Sri Anjaneyulu Chandubatla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri M. Hamsa Raj, learned Standing Counsels for Andhra Pradesh State Finance Corporation appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. Since both the writ petitions are filed against the same respondents and as the question of law and fact to be considered is identical, both the writ petitions are heard together and being disposed of by way of this common order.

3. The petitioner approached this Court with the following prayer in W.P.No.4499 of 2016:

“ ..... to issue a writ or order or directions particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Demand Notice under Section 32(G) of SFCs Act 1951 read with Sec 25 of APRR Act 1864 dated 4.2.2016 bearing No.AFC/KHM/MRD/2015-16/1602 as illegal, arbitrary and bad in law and consequently restrain the respondents herein from trying to recover the time barred debt from the petitioner herein and pass ...”.

4. The petitioner approached this Court with the following prayer in W.P.No.4613 of 2016:

“ ..... to issue a writ or order, orders or directions particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Demand Notice under Section 32(G) of SFCs Act, 1951 read with Sec 25 of APRR Act, 1864 dated 4.2.2016 bearing No.AFC/KHM/MRD/2015- 16/1603, pending disposal of the above writ petition in this Hon’ble Court and pass...”.

PERUSED THE RECORD

5. The case of the petitioner in both the W.P.Nos.

4499 and 4613 OF 2016 in brief, is as under:

Petitioner is the same in W.P.No.4499 and 4613 of 2016 and also the respondents.

It is the case of the petitioner that, one Company-

formerly known as M/s. Kinnera Streel Ltd and presently known as M/s. Torus India Ltd., had availed a working capital term loan from the 1st respondent corporation for a sum of Rs. 94.00 Lakhs towards term loan and out of the said sum Rs. 60.25 lakhs were disbursed to the company by the 1st respondent corporation. The Loan agreement dated 31.01.2001 had been executed between the company and the 1st respondent corporation, where the petitioner herein was one of the sureties for the said loan. Subsequently, the said company landed into serious financial crises and failed to repay the loan amount. Later, the company has been declared as Sick Company under Section 22 of the SICA Act.

Thereafter, the respondent corporation had issued a dated 28.10.2014 to the petitioner herein, indicating that the company is in debt over Rs.7,37,76,344/- and directed the petitioner herein to the repay the said amount and failing which the respondents would initiate action against the petitioner under section 32 (G) of the State Financial Corporations Act. Aggrieved by the said notice, the petitioner herein filed representations date 20.11.2014 and 25.04.2015 to the 2nd and the 1st respondent respectively stating that the claim of the respondents is barred by the limitation and further the Company was declared Sick Unit. However, the respondents failed to consider the petitioner’s representations.

Subsequently, the respondents issued demand notice bearing Nos. AFC/KHM/MRD/2015-16/1603 and AFC/KHM/MRD/2015-16/1602 dated 04.02.2016 to the effect that the respondents are proposing to take action under section 32 (G) of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 r/w section 25 of the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 indicating that the petitioner’s personal property shall be attached and the amount due of Rs.9,55,58,000/- to the corporation will be recovered from the sale of the petitioner’s property. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent corporation, the present Writ Petitions are filed.

6. It is represented by both learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in State of K