JUDGMENT Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. Supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3 is taken on record. From the perusal of the said supplementary counter affidavit filed by the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Shahabad, District Hardoi. It appears that the Branch Manager and other officers of the Bank have done a lot of efforts to persuade the petitioner and other co-defaulters to arrive at One Time Settlement. Lastly, an effort was made by the bank authorities during Lok Adalat which was organized on 12.11.2016 and a clear offer was given to the petitioner and the two legal heirs of Jagdish Singh (deceased) that an amount of Rs.1,06,819/- which is interest component shall be waived. However, the said offer was not accepted by the petitioner and other legal heirs. It has been stated on behalf of the bank that as on date the total amount of Rs.3,17,209/-, out of the amount of interest component is the sum of Rs.1,06,819/- can be waived provided the petitioner and other legal heirs deposit 30% of the difference of the total outstanding amount and the interest component which comes out to be Rs.210390/- within a week. It has also been stated on behalf of the Bank that in case 30% of the said amount is deposited by the defaulters, they would be given further 60 days time to make payment of the rest of the amount. In view of the aforesaid, it is provided that if the petitioner and the other legal heirs of Jagdish Singh (deceased) make deposit of 30% of the amount of Rs.210390/- within 10 days from today and further deposit rest of the amount within 60 days thereafter, the recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall remain stayed. However, in case of any default, it shall be open to the Bank authorities to proceed in accordance with law for making recovery of the outstanding amount from all the legal heirs of the deceased defaulter-Jagdish Singh. Counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no. 2 and reply to the short counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 3 on behalf of respondent no. 2 has been filed by Shri Prashant Kumar Srivastava, which are taken on record. The Bank appears to have taken some action against the respondent no. 2 by passing the order dated 11.11.2016 which has been annexed as Annexure SA-3 to the counter affidavit filed by the Bank. 3 on behalf of respondent no. 2 has been filed by Shri Prashant Kumar Srivastava, which are taken on record. The Bank appears to have taken some action against the respondent no. 2 by passing the order dated 11.11.2016 which has been annexed as Annexure SA-3 to the counter affidavit filed by the Bank. The respondent no. 2 will have opportunity to represent his case before the higher authorities, if he is aggrieved by the order dated 11.11.2016. However, the Bank authorities while taking decision in the matter of respondent no. 2 shall be guided by the principles of equity, good conscience and justice. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is finally disposed off.