SRI K v. vs VEDANTHA

IDFC First Bank, Door No 23-36, Second Floor, Yadhu Nivas, Nearby Pista House, Jyothinagar Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana-502032 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., 6-3-1109111P202, 1st Floor, Jewel Pavani Tower, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500082 Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be ...RESPONDENTS pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one r the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents No. 3 to 9 in calling arr threatenrng with dire consequences by sending their recovery agents to the res c by illegal means without following the guidelines issued b 7 lndia vide circular dated 12-08-2022 in RBti. ORG.REC.65/21.04.15812022-23, is nothing but arbitrary, it e violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articl: Constitution of lndia and also violative of the guidelines of lndia. Consequently, direct Respondents No.3 to 9 to follov, Reserve Bank of lndia vide circular dated '12-08-2022 in Fl oRG.REC.65/2 1 .O4.1 58t2022-23. :nce of the petitioner the Reserve Bank of o22-23t108, DOR. 3al, null and void and ; 14,19 and 21 of the the Reserve Bank of guidelines issued by v2022-23t108, DOR. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ma the Respondent Nos. 3 to I not to send their recovery agen petitioner in violation of the guidelines issued by the Rese. circular dated 12-08-2022 in ORG.REC.65/21.O4.15812022-23, pending disposal of the atr, RBI/20:2 )umstances stated in / be pleased to direct s to the house of the e Bank of lndia vide '-231108, DOR. ve writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJATH KUMAR PRADHAI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI K. V. V. VEDANTHA (cENTRAL GOVT COUNr ]HARYA EL) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI K. RATHANGA pAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and S: SRI M.p. KASH\i .P Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI R. MANGULAL Counsel forthe Respondent No.7: SRI VIVEK JAIN Counsel for the Respondent No.8: SRI B. SRIHARI The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.239 16 of 2025 ORDER: Sri P. Rajath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri K.V.V. Vedantha Charya, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government, for respondent No.l; Sri K. Rathanga Pani Rcddy, learned counscl lor respondent No.2; Sri M.P. Kashyap, learned counsel for rcspondent Nos.3 and 5; Sri R. Mangulal, learned counsel for respondent No.4; Sri Vivek Jain, lcarned counsel for respondent No.7 and Sri B. Srihari, Icarned counscl for rcspondent No.8.

2. Despite service of notice, none appeared for remaining respondents.

3. When the matter is taken up lor hearing, learncd counscl for pctitioner submitted that the issuc raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5200 of 2024, dated

25.04.2024 and therefore, the same order may be passed in this rvrit pctition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: "8. For the aforesaid reasons and as thc procedure adopted by the respondent Nos.4 to 7 for recovery of loan amount from the petitioner, amounts to violation of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 2l of the Constitution ol India, this Court deems it appropriate to direct thc respondents, to ensure that the agents engaged by them fcr recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly follow the guidelines and instructions issued by the Resen'e Bank ol India and also the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur's case {1 supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma's casc (2 supra). 9. With the above said dircction, thc writ pctitior-r is 2 disposed of. " - -

4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5,7 and t rave no objection- Accordingly, in terms of the ordcr passed t y this Court tn

5. w.p.No.5200 0f 2024, dated 25.o4.2024, and for the reas rns alike, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authoritii s and their agents to scrupulously follow the guidelines/ instructions issr-Lr d by the Reservc Bank of tndia in its circular dated 12.08.2O22 and alsc the judgments ol Hon,ble Supreme court in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Ptakash Kaur'ls case and ICICI Bank v. shanti Devi sharma'2s case, while r-t covering the loan amounts from thc petitioner. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall I fand closed '(zootl2 scc 711 '(zooa) 7 scc 532 StIi P. PONNA KRISHNA ASI ISTANT REGISTRAR i,J \./ SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To. '-'1. Th" Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry- of Finance Ne :r ' Delhi' Delhi -110001 . 2 Reserve Bank of l"di;,"R;;:'6i'6iii"i6"n""itt't'nagr" ' Sansad Marg' New 3. SBI Card, Unit Nos 3C 3D and 3E' 3rd Flogr' Queen; Plaza' 1-8-382' " 6ilJ,ii priru, s.p niaJ' se"'no"rabad'.Telanoana i00003 4. one cc to Sri naptn'"fu"'itIiFi;o["n' Ajryocat; IoF;r rcl 5.oneCCtoSriK.v.v'V;i;;ih;9h;ti'(bentralGortCbunsel)[oPUCl 6. il; cc 6 Sti k. Ratha;s; CJni neoov' AovocateloF'r i. 6;; dc i; 5;i vt.e rasrr"vap, Advocat-e[oP1JC] 8. 6;;6c i; 5;i R- Manguti' AovocatelQelpl g. One CC to Sri Vivek Jain, advocateluru-\-l ib.il; d6 i; s;i B. Srinari, Advocate[oPUC] 'cl '1 '1 . Two CD Copies TJ BS I I I HIGH COURT DATED:2411112025 ORDER WP.No.23916 of 2025 ( il: ({oa + ) -9 , t/, I 221 20fr : ./ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (A- z\ e]-