V. D. GYANI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioners, in this bench of petitions, are Co-operative Societies, registered as such under Sections 9 of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act. Since these petitions raise a common question of law with a common prayer and the arguments advanced being common, they are being disposed of by a common order. ( 2 ) THE respondent-State of M. P. floated a scheme known as 'raf TAR YOJNA' for the benefit of tribalsscheduled caste and scheduled tribes, nomads and semi-nomads. The scheme envisaged providing of trucks buses for the economic upliftment of the weaker sections. In order to implement this scheme, certain guidelines have been provided as contained in Annexure R-2 filed by the respondent. ( 3 ) THE eligibility for availing of the benefit under this scheme has been enumerated in Clauses 4 to 4. 5 of Annexure R-2. A Selection committee to be constituted by the Collector of the District or his nominee, the Regional Transport Authority and Executive Officer of District Antayavasai sahakari Vikas committee. This committee was to recommend cases for providing trucks/buses. ( 4 ) PETITIONER Societies case in short is, that on fulfilment of all conditions they were recommended for being allotted a truck. They have deposited their share. The truck was to be presented to the petitioner by the then Chief Minister in a function which was scheduled to be held on 31st march, 91. Their grievance is that having called the truck for formal presentation, it was never returned due to opposition by the local members. The petitioners pray for restoring the vehicle-the truck to the petitioner society and also make good the loss suffered by the society on account of its illegal retention. ( 5 ) SO far Respondent No. 4 Nigam is concerned, Shri Kulkarni, submitted that it has made a clean breast of itself that as per provisions of scheme, on recommendation of the Respondent No, 2, Jila Antyavasayee sahakari Samiti a loan of Rs. 3,72,400/- was granted to the petitioner society and role of 'nigam'-Respondent No. 4, was complete. To secure this loan, the allotted vehicle was required to be hypothecated to the 'nigam' till repayment of loan advanced by it. The vehicle is purchased by the Jila antyavasayee Sahakari Vikas Samiti Maryadit and delievered to the Co-operative society concerned. 3,72,400/- was granted to the petitioner society and role of 'nigam'-Respondent No. 4, was complete. To secure this loan, the allotted vehicle was required to be hypothecated to the 'nigam' till repayment of loan advanced by it. The vehicle is purchased by the Jila antyavasayee Sahakari Vikas Samiti Maryadit and delievered to the Co-operative society concerned. The respondent-State has come out with a case that the scheme intended to benefit the weaker sections was not properly publicised. The people at large could not even know about it while others in hot haste formed the societies and availed of the benefit under the scheme. On receiving complaints by the Administration that only one tehsil namely Shajapur, was being benefited to the exclusion of others, the administration thought it fit to enquire into the matter and consequently delivery of truck was withhold. The object behind the scheme was to benefit as many as people as possible and not confined to a particular place. The other tehsil of the same district could not avail of the benefit of the scheme. ( 6 ) THE respondent-State, it was contended by Shri Nigam learned government Advocate, that the allotment of vehicle is within the discretion of the Nigam and the respondents. The petitioners can not claim any vested right therein. ( 7 ) SHRI Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners sub-mitted that not only the societies money is blocked but they are also incurring heavy liability in the shape of interest. ( 8 ) KEEPING in view the object behind the scheme, it must be emphasised that the petitioner-Society should not be put to loss on account of the investment made by them. Recurring a liability of interest, should not only be taken care of but also guarded against the respondents. There is some justification in the respondents' contention that since the Scheme was not widely published, the other tehsils of the same district, could not avail of the benefit of the Scheme, and the matter was being looked into by the administration ; but it should not be unduly delayed. It is for this reason that we direct the respondents to complete the enquiry within three months from today and take suitable measures to see that the petitioners Societies are not unduly burdened with interest. It is for this reason that we direct the respondents to complete the enquiry within three months from today and take suitable measures to see that the petitioners Societies are not unduly burdened with interest. On completion of enquiry, if the petitioners are found entitled to, the grant of benefit, the vehicle/truck/bus as the case may be handed over to the Society on fulfilment of other conditions. Since the Scheme is intended to benefit of poor/weaker sections, amongst tribals and the scheduled castes, the respondents would do well to expedite the same, to avoid any further burden of interest which can even be reduced or waived. Its question of interest is, however. left to the respondents. ( 9 ) WITH the above direction, these petitions stand finally disposed of with no order to costs. Security cost be refunded to the petitioner in each case after verification. Order accordingly. .