UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.---The question before the Court is whether the Dispute Resolution committee of the State Bank of Pakistan in exercise of its authority under BPD Circular No.29 of 2002 read with B.P.D. Circular .No.8 of 2003 has jurisdiction to review its decision conveyed to the parties by letter dated 4-8-2004. On a representation by the petitioner borrower to the effect that the Forced Sale Value ("FSV") of the assets charged to the respondent-Bank was Rs.1.0 million rather than Rs.10.0 million, the said Committee by letter dated 14-10-2004 modified its aforesaid decision and reduced the settlement amount from Rs.9.154 million to Rs.5.533 million.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank has defended the refusal by the bank to comply the revised decision of the Committee on the grounds, firstly, that it had no jurisdiction to review its earlier decision and secondly, that the revision is based on a mistaken view of the FSV of the charged property.
3. Before considering the objection of jurisdiction, the learned counsel for the petitioner was invited by the Court to show material justifying the reduced FSV of the charged property. He has produced on record a copy of the loan agreement dated 14-1-1989 between the parties. The project evaluation report attached thereto states that collateral security in the amount of Rs.1.00 million was required for the loan. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner was under a duty to provide security for Rs.1.00 million, therefore, the value of his charged property should be treated at that level. The provisions of B.P.D. Circular No.29 are concerned with the FSV of the charged security given by a borrower rather than the value of such security that was necessary to avail the facility. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is based on the latter premise. That rationale is, however, is not relevant for purpose of the settlement amount worked out by the SBP Dispute Resolution Committee. Resultantly, this Court does not find merit in this petition which is, accordingly, dismisse.