Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of vs Learnecr Standing counser crid not dispute the submissions of

Piramal Finance Limited, Rep by its Chief Manager, #60'1 , 6th Floor, Amiti Building, Agastya Corporate Park, Kamani Junction, Opp Fire Station, LBS [/arg, Kurla(W), Mumbai - 400070. HDB Financial Services Limited, Rep by its Chief [Manager, LIG-891, Dharma Reddy Co{ony Phase l, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana 500085 ...RESPONDENTS 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 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 5 in attempting to recover amounts from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal, and high-handed manner without following the due process of law and in blatant violation of the Reserve Bank of lndia Circular dated 12.O8.2022 bearing .No. RBll2O22-231108, DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.04.15812022-23, and further declaring the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said Circular as unco nstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the respondent authorities to refrain from undertaking any coercive or unlaMul recovery measures against the petitioner and to strictly comply with the due process of law and the aforesaid Circular in all recovery proceedings, and further restrain respondent Nos. 3 to 5, their agents, recovery agents, executives. managers, or any person acting on their behalf from engaging in any acts of intimidation, harassment, humiliation, or intrusion into the privacy of the petitioner or his family members, referees or friends, including persistent or anonymous calls, threatening messages, or physical visits to the petitioner's premises, and further direct respondent No. 2 to enforce the said RBI Circular in letter and spirit and to initiate appropriate and stringent action against the errant officials of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 for violating legal norms, and pending disposal of the writ petition, direct the respondent Nos.3 to 5 not to resort to any coercive measures against the petitioner except through lawful means and in strict adherence to the Circular daled 12-O8.2022. Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. THAKUR MANASWINI SINGH, REP. SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SC FOR CENTRAL GOW. The Courl made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.3445O of 2()25 ORDER: Heard Ms. Thakur Manaswini Singh, learned counsel representing Sri Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Central Government for respondent No.1. 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.52OO of 2024, dated 25.04.2024 and therefore, the same order may be passeci in this u,rit petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: "8. For the aforesaid reasons and as the proccdure 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 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court dcems it appropriate to direct the respondents, to cnsure 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). 9 . With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of." 2

3. Learnecr Standing counser crid not dispute the submissions of -tI learned counsel for the petitioncr.

4. In tcrms of the order passed b-v this court in w.p.No.S2oo of 2024, dated 25.04.2024, and for the reasons alike, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to scrupulously follow the guiderincs/ instructions in the IiBI circular dated 12.08.2022, arrd also the judgments of Hon,ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. prakash Kaur and othersr and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma and othersz. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, sha-ll stand closed. No costs 2-a C? )+s.' 13, To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. S.MALLIKARJUNA ASSISTANT R R \ SECTION OFFICER

1. The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delfii U on of lndia. 2. The Chief General Manager, Reserve gank & triAia (RBl), 6, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001

3. The Chief N4anager, Avanse Financial Services Pvt. Ltd, E Wing, 4th Floor, Times Square, Andheri-Kurla Road, Gamdevi, Marol, Andheri (East), Mumbai, Maharashtra 400059

4. The Chief Manager, Piramal Finance Limited, 601, 6th Floor, Amiti Building, Agastya Corporate Park, Kamani Junction, Opp Fire Station, LBS Marg, Kurla(W), Mumbai - 400070.

5. The Chief Manager, HDB Financial Services Limited, LIG-891, Dharma Reddy Colony Phase l, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana 500085

6. One CC to SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SC FOR CENTRAL GOW. [OPUC] B. One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLIC|TOR GENERAL OF lNDIA, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OPUC]

9. Two CD Copies BSR GJP k HIGH COURT DATED: 1911112025 ORDER WP.No.34450 of 2025 ..n "ti I ,.-. 10 tt8 2026 * * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS \\ .og<ull ()-- ^666