P.Hanumantha Rao v. The Deputy General Manager, Reserve Bank of India & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- C V RAMULU
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
The only complaint of the petitioners is that they are all the retired employees of various Governmental Departments. Being lured by the interest rate of the 3rd respondent-Bhimavaram Cooperative Urban Bank Limited, they have deposited their retiral benefits with the bank. Unfortunately, the 3rd respondent bank was closed, by invoking Section 35(A) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, by the Reserve Bank of India. However, during the pendency of those proceedings, the depositors are being paid certain limited amounts. Thereafter, the petitioners have made a representation on 16-04-2005 to the Chief General Manager, In-charge, Reserve Bank of India, Urban Banks Department, Saifabad, requesting for a thorough probe and do justice. The said application, according to the petitioners, is
Operative part
not disposed of. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merits, the respondents are directed to dispose of the said application, dated 16-04-2005, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass appropriate orders as per law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ 16-06-2006 Prv
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.