Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of vs Le,arned Standing Counsel did not dispute the submissions of

4. IDFC FIRST Bank Limited, Rep by its Chief Manager' Groul{ Floor, veer JnrrU"ri, No 1-10-0311t1, opiroslte Shoppers Stop, Chikoti Gardens, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana 50001 6

5. YES BANK, Rep by its chief Manager Groundfloor, s.!op No,]1, 77, NH 65, eoJtliimbi' ftf ada i botony, Jawa. -hir Colony, Chanda Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana 500050

6. RBL Bank, Rep. by its chief Managel Shop n9-5^-!tJ.0 and 5-4111, Ground floor, ChanOa irtag-ar, Hyderabad, Telangana 500050

7. SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited ($e-t-QaroJ,-R"! by its chief H4r'.ig"i, SdG Bini of lndia Credit Cards Unit Nos 3C 3D and 3E 3rd Floor i"ringlnrsobom - Oueeis plaza 18382 Queens Plaza SP Road Secunderabad r g. L AND T Finance Limited, Rep by its Chief Manager 6th Floor, t16. i7z, C.S.f noad, Kalina,'sairtacruz (East), Mumbai - 400 098, Maharashtra, India -B-rindavan, Plot

9. AXIS BANK, Rep by its Chief Manager Ground Floor, Sriven Ma.ll,'Miyapur. hdll e f.lig'"r,-ic h,ilpbyees Colo-ny, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur, Hyderabad' Telangana 500049 petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be ...RESPONDENTS , ri' ,.ii+fidti; .:tii.iffi.siagi tffiB;"ffi pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent Nos. 3 to 09 in attempting to recover amounts from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal, and high- handed mant'ler without following the due process of law and in blatant violation of the Reserve Bank of lndia Circular dated 12.08.2022 bearing No. RBll2O22- 23l108,DOR.ORG.REC.65121.O4.15812022-23, and further declaring the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said Circular as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the respondent iluthorities to refrain from undertaking any coercive or unlawful recovery ITI€,lsUres against the petitioner and to strictly comply with the due process of la'rv and the aforesaid Circular in all recovery proceedings, and further restrain respcndent Nos. 3 to 09, their agents, recovery agents, executives, managers, ol' any person acting on their behalf from engaging in any acts of intimidation, ttarassment, humitiation, or intrusion into the privacy of the petitioner or his family members, referees or friends, including persistent or anonymous calls, threatetring messages, or physical visits to the petitioner's premises, and fuither direct respondent No. 2 to enforce the said RBI Circular in letter and spirit and to initiata appropriate and stringent action against. the errant officials of respondent Nrrs. 3 to 09 for viotating legal norms, and pending disposal of the writ petition, direcl: the respondent Nos. 3 to 09 not to resort to any coercive measures against the pt:titioner except through laMul means and in strict adherence to the Circular dated 12.O8.2022. counsel for the Petitioner : SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANTNDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SC FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Counsel for ttre Respondent No.4 : SRI HARI BATHINA Counselfor ttre Respondent No.8 : Ms.K.RAMYA Counsel for thre Respondent No.9 : SRI M.P.KASHAP Counsel for the Respondent No.2,3,5to7 : The Court marle the foltowing: ORDER i, . ,:,t...:.. l . .: : -.j-.+li THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHTEMAPAKA UIRIT PETITION No.3O2O8 of 2O25 ORDER: Heard Mr. Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for Central Government for respondent No.1; Mr. Sri Hari Bathina, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4; Ms. K. Ramya, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.8 and Mr. M.P. Kashy.p, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.9. Perused the record.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.S2OO of 2024, dated 25.04.2024 and therefore, the same order may be passed in this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: '8. For the aforesaid reasons and as the 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 of India, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents, to ensure that the agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly follow the guidelines and instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur's case (1 supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma's case (2 supra). g. With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of." I I I / I / .. .l \ \ \ \.\ i i I I i Il 2

3. Le,arned Standing Counsel did not dispute the submissions of learned ,:ounsel for the petitioner.

4. In terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.520O of 2024, dzrted 25.O4.2024, and for the reascns a!ike, this writ petition is dispor;ed of directing the respondent authorities to scrupulously follor,v the guidelines/instructions in the RBI Circular dated L2.O8.2C'22, and also the judgments of Honble Supreme Court in ICICI Ba.nk Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur and othersl and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti flevi Sharma and others2. F'ending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. No costs. To, /TRUE COPY// / - SD/-T.SRINIVAS REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER

1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi 2. The chief Genelq.! IManager, Reserve Bank of lndia (RBr), 6, sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001

3. one cc to SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANTNDRA REDDy, Advocate. [opUC] 4. One CC) to sc FoR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. IOPUC] 5. One CO to SRI HAR| BATH|NA, Advocate. tOpUC] 6. One CC to trIs.K.RAMyA, Advocate. Iopucl 7. One CC) to SRI M.P.KASHAP, Advocate. [OpUC] 8. Two CEr Copies. \ BSK t (2007)25(C7t1 , [2008) 7 SCC 532 !' ! HIGH COURT DATED:1411112025 ( THE S ) r, 7 r.' 1Q l,.r$ * (-) i ?.. :Y * ORDER WP.No.30208 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS "$' W