No right to compel one-time settlement when bank discretion and absence of enforceable duty defeat writ relief.

Mandamus does not lie to compel a bank or financial institution to accept a borrower's one-time settlement proposal, because such settlement is discretionary and no borrower has a legal right to insist on compromise terms of his choice. Certiorari is available only for error of law apparent on the face of the record, and the petitioner failed to show any enforceable statutory duty requiring acceptance of the proposal. The RBI guidelines relied on were not available to a wilful defaulter, and the court also noted that the petitioner had not approached with clean hands. The challenge to the bank's refusal therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to a writ directing the respondent bank to accept the one-time settlement proposal and to quash the bank's refusal letter.

Analysis: A writ of mandamus lies only to enforce a legal right corresponding to a statutory or public duty, and a writ of certiorari lies for error of law apparent on the face of the record. Acceptance of a one-time settlement is a matter of consent and discretion, amounting in substance to rescheduling of a loan. No borrower has a legal right to compel a bank or financial institution to enter into a compromise on terms proposed by the borrower. The RBI guidelines relied upon were not available to a wilful defaulter, and the petitioner failed to establish any enforceable statutory duty on the respondent to accept the proposal. The Court also accepted the respondent's case that the petitioner had not approached with clean hands.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to a writ compelling acceptance of the one-time settlement, and the challenge to the bank's refusal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A court will not issue mandamus to compel a bank or financial institution to grant a one-time settlement or reschedule a loan in the absence of a corresponding statutory duty and enforceable legal right, particularly where the relief sought is discretionary in nature and the borrower is shown to be a wilful defaulter.

---