M.M Kumar, J.
1. Mr. Vishal Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner has pleaded that the party has taken away her brief and virtually pleads no instructions. Despite that we take cognizance of the proposition raised in this case. A perusal of the order dated 10.02.2012, passed by this Court, would show that a Full Bench of this Court in Shiv Charan Singh v. Haryana State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited(CWP No. 7446 of 2011, decided on 09.01.2012) has held that the parties by an agreement cannot confer jurisdiction on the Corporation to proceed against the guarantor under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 (for short ‘the Act’) because the jurisdiction under the aforesaid provisions of law can be exercised only against an industrial concern. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the proceedings initiated by the Corporation against the petitioner who is a guarantor under Section 29 of the Act. Therefore, order dated 12.04.2005 (P-10) which is subject matter of challenge in the instant petition cannot be sustained nor can the calculation would be sustainable made in P-11. Therefore, in terms of the ratio of the judgment of Full Bench in Shiv Charan Singh (supra), the writ petition deserves acceptance.
2. The writ petition is allowed. Action under Section 29 of the Act initiated against the guarantor is set aside. However, passing of this order would not debar the respondent to proceed for the recovery of its due against the petitioner in accordance with law.
Comments