JUDGMENT : SATYA POOT MEHROTRA and RAJESH CHANDRA, JJ. – The petitioner took loan from the respondent No. 3- Union Bank of India for opening of Rice Mill in partnership. The petitioner is one of the partners of the said Mill namely Shivam Rice Mill. 2. The petitioner committed default. in payment of loan. Consequently recovery proceedings purporting to be under the U.P. Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 were initiated. Recovery Citation dated 22.11.2010 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) was issued in this regard. 3. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition" inter alia, praying for quashing the said Recovery Citation dated 22.11.2010. 4. The grievance raised by the petitioner was that as the loan taken by the petitioner was not under any State Sponsored Scheme, the provisions of U.P. Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 could not be invoked in the present case. 5. A short Counter Affidavit has been filed today on behalf of the respondent No.3. It is, inter alia, stated in the short Counter Affidavit that the Recovery Certificate under the U.P. Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 was sent to the Collector concerned by mistake and due to pressure of work. It is, inter alia, further stated that the Recovery Certificate has since been with-drawn by the respondent No.3 by issuing a letter dated 30.4.2011 to the Deputy District Magistrate, Tehsil Jamania District Ghazipur. 6. As the Recovery Certificate has been withdrawn by the respondent No. 3, no cause of action survives to the petitioner and no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition. 7. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. It is, however, made clear that the petitioner will not be responsible to pay any collection charges in respect of the aforesaid recovery. Petition Disposed Of.