Sangeeta Mandavi D/o Shri Baliram Mandavi Aged About 33 Years Presently Posted As Beat v. 1 - The Union Of India Through Department Of Financial Services Ministry Of Finance
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:29741 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3370 of 2025 Sangeeta Mandavi D/o Shri Baliram Mandavi Aged About 33 Years Presently Posted As Beat Officer, Forest And Climate Change Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Bailadila, District- South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, R/o Tirakadand, Post- Puri, Tehsil - Charama, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The Union Of India Through Department Of Financial Services Ministry Of Finance, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Director, Of Institutional Finance, Finance Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Reserve Bank Of India Through Governor, Reserve Bank Of India, 4th Floor, Amar Building, Sir P.M. Road Mumbai - 400 001 (M.S.) VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.07.02 17:54:04 +0530 4 - Banking Ombudsman Reserve Bank Of India, Regional Office Raipur, Subhashish Parisar Satya Prem Vihar, Mahadev Ghat Road, Sunder Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through Chairman, Corporate Office Sector 24, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Limited (Cifcl) Having Corporate Office At Chola Crest, C54-55 And Super B-4, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600032 7 - State Bank Of India Having Registered Office At Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400021 2 8 - Spash Advisor Private Limited Through Its Proprietor Manoj Kumar Pradhan, Having Registered Office At Office No. Ff, 1st Floor, Dm Plaza, Naighar Chowk, Chhota Para, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001. Branch Office At Behind Vashundhara City Mall, Near Tulsi Chowk, Gangapur, Ambikapur, Surguja, Chhattisgarh – 497001. 9 - Rv Group Through Its Proprietor Abhay Gupta, Having Registered Office At Office No. Ff, 1st Floor, Dm Plaza, Naighar Chowk, Chhota Para, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 ---- Respondents
Legal Reasoning
For Petitioner : Mr. Aniruddh Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate For Union of India : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI For State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A. For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Raj Sengale, Advocate For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Anumesh Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 02/07/2025 Heard. 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on the following relief(s) : “10.1) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records leading to present case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court: 3 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to restrain the Respondent Banks from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner; 10.3) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 4 (Banking Ombudsman) to initiate enquiry /investigation against the Respondent Banks and their respective officers with respect to their involvement in the illegal disbursement of personal loans to the Petitioner in gross violation of the notification, circular, and guidelines issued by the Respondent No. 3 (Reserve Bank of India); 10.4) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to take necessary action to recover the amount from the Private Respondents as per law; 10.5) Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.6) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 4 2. By filing the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the illegal and unauthorized action on the part of Respondent No. 05 to Respondent No. 07 (hereinafter referred as 'Respondent Banks') whereby multiple personal loans of exorbitant amount (Rs. 25,34,000/- in the present petition) have been sanctioned in the name of more than 300 victims of fraud including the petitioner herein (hereinafter collectively referred as 'victims') without receiving any application from the victims themselves. Respondent No. 08 and Respondent No. 09 (hereinafter referred as 'Private Respondents') are the Direct Selling Agents (hereinafter referred as 'DSA') of the Respondent Banks and multiple personal loans were approved and sanctioned by the Respondent Banks in the name of victims via single OTP with the help of Private Respondents. The Private Respondents committed fraud upon the victims by convincing the victims to invest 50% of loan amount in their personal bank accounts and promised to provide high rate of interest /returns. 3. The challenge is also made against the manner in which the Respondent Banks have sanctioned the personal loan of the victims in gross violations of the notification, guideline, and circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India (hereinafter referred as 'RBI') titled 'Reset of Floating Interest Rate on Equated Monthly Installments (EMI) based Personal Loans dated 18.08.2023, Guidelines on Fair Practices Code for Lenders dated 05.05.2003 and recent Master Circular on Management of Advances dated 01.04.2025, respectively. The detailed 5 advisory and caution regarding sanctioning of personal loans has been provided by RBI to all the Scheduled Commercial Banks, Regional Rural Banks, Primary Co-operative Banks, State Co-operative Banks, and Non-Banking Financial Companies (including Housing Finance Companies). However, without following the guidelines, notifications, and the circulars the Respondent Banks have sanctioned multiple personal loans of exorbitant amount on single OTP without any application from victims and after disbursement of sanctioned loan, 50% of amount is transferred to another bank account with the help of Private Respondent and the officers of Respondent Banks. 4. It is admitted fact that the Petitioner is a member of Schedule Tribe and resident of a tribal area i.e. Kanker. Further, some of the victims are Teachers and some are Assistant Professors in their respective Schools and Colleges and they have intentionally targeted the victims from tribal areas owing to the fact that they have no knowledge of banking and finance and Petitioner and other victims were the easy targets made available to them just fulfill their selfish desire of getting money in the form of service fee, interest, and ancillary charges arising out of the exorbitant amount of personal loans. The collusion between the Respondent Banks and Private Respondents is also evident from the fact that the 4-5 personal loans sanctioned in the name of the individual victims and the same were disbursed at once within a time frame of 24 hours, even though the One Time Password (OTPs) were fraudulently obtained days/weeks before the date of disbursement. Immediately 6 upon realizing the fraud, the petitioner approached the police authorities and an FIR was registered bearing Crime No.50/2025 at Police Station Kotwali, District Raipur for the offence under Sections 318(4) & 3(5) of BNS and another FIR dated 08.04.2025 bearing Crime No.103/2025 was registered at Police Station Kanker, District Kanker for the offence under Sections 420, 34 and Section 120-B of IPC, 1860. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has already moved the applications before the Banking Ombudsman, which are pending consideration. He further submits that the petitioner is the victim as the loan has been taken at the instance of the petitioner, however he is having no knowledge about the said loan. It has been contended that the petitioner is a low paid employees and he is facing hardship due to the aforesaid act of the Banking employees as well as Companies. In the present petition, the petitioner is seeking only a direction to the Banking Ombudsman to decide the matter in accordance with law. 6. Considering the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the opinion that since the remedy available to the petitioner to file appropriate applications before the Banking Ombudsman, at this stage, it would be appropriate that a direction be given to the petitioner to pursue their remedy before the Banking Ombudsman and the concerned Banking Ombudsman, who is in receipt the copies of the complaints on 7 15.05.2025 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders while considering the matter on merits in accordance with law. 7. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to file appropriate application for grant of interim relief before respondent No.4 i.e. Banking Ombudsman Reserve Bank of India, Regional Office Raipur, Subhashish Parisar, Satya Prem Vihar, Mahadev Ghat Road, Sunder Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh within a period of 15 days and, in turn the Banking Ombudsman concerned is directed to consider the said application and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of 30 days from the date of filing of the application by the petitioner. 8. Till the application for interim relief is decided by the Banking Ombudsman, the Bank authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. 9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, instant petition stands disposed rights and contentions of the parties are left open. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant