JUDGMENT K.J. Shetty, C.J. - The petitioners are Primary Silk Weavers Handloom Co-operative Societies. They were given what is termed as share capital loan. The loan was given to the societies for the purpose of distribution to individual silk weavers who are the members of the society. The loan was advanced under an agreement and clause 6 of the agreement provides as follows : "The creditor may realise the sum to be declared by the said Director of Handloom and Textitles Uttar Pradesh under the provisions herein- before contained as when due to the creditor on account of the loan by sale without the intervention of Court of the property furnished as security and in the event of the said property being insufficient the the balance due may be recovered from the borrower as arrears of land revenue." 2. The agreement also contains terms of repayment of loan. The last instalment would be payable on February 23, 1987 but before the said date the respondents started recovery proceedings. Notice has been issued to the chairman of the society calling upon him why the loan should not be recovered as arrears of land revenue. It is also stated that the steps are being taken to arrest the chairman of the society and put him in jail. 3. Various contentions have been urged by Sri D. P. S. Chauhau, learned counsel for the petitioners challenging the recovery proceedings. We do not, however, think it necessary to examine all these contentions since those petitions could be conveniently disposed of on the ground that the recovery is being made in contravention of the terms of the loan. 4. As per clause 6 of the agreement to which we have earlier referred, it is necessary for the respondent no. 2 to recover the outstanding loan as determined by the Director of Handloom and Textiles by sale of the security and, if the amount realised thereon falls short of the arrears, due, or, in the event of the security being insufficient, the balance due may be recovered from borrower as arrears of land revenue. There is no material before us to find out whether these steps have been taken by respondent no. 3. The notice served on the chairman of the society, prima facie, indicates that the loan is sought to be recovered as arrears of land revenue without first proceeding against the security. There is no material before us to find out whether these steps have been taken by respondent no. 3. The notice served on the chairman of the society, prima facie, indicates that the loan is sought to be recovered as arrears of land revenue without first proceeding against the security. There is no other material before us to hold to the contrary. We must state, therefore, that the respondent no. 3 has no jurisdiction to recover the loan amount without first proceeding against the security and that too after determination and declaration by the Director of Handloom and Textiles. It is only when that security falls short of the requirement, the respondent may recover the balance from the society as arrears of land revenue. 5. Mr. Chauhan also urged that a large sum of money by way of rebate due to the society is lying in deposit with the Director of Industries and that rebate amount should be adjusted against the loan repayable. We do not think that we could accede to this contention. It is a separate matter which the petitioners could agitate before the appropriate authority. 6. In the result, these writ petition are allowed in part. There shall be a direction against respondents nos. 2 to 5 not to recover the amount outstanding under the share capital loan, from the petitioners as arrears of land revenue, without having recourse to the procedure provided under clause 6 of the agreement to which the societies are parties. In other words, the respondents are at liberty to recover the dues only in accordance with the procedure provided under clause 6 of the agreement. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.