Bombay High Court
Raj Narain Bharadwaj vs State Bank Of India on 2 February, 2024
Author: G. S. Kulkarni
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
2024:BHC-OS:1938-DB
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1864 OF 2024
Grace Thomas & Anr. ... Petitioners
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1826 OF 2024
WITH
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1819 OF 2024
Raj Narain Bhardwaj & Anr. ... Petitioners
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 2735 OF 2024
Lt. Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (Retd.) ... Petitioner
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondents
Mr. Prateek Sersaria, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. D.J. Kakalia, Mrs. Bhavna
Singh Jaipuria and Mr. Paresh Patkar i/b. Mulla and Mulla & Craigie
Blunt & Caroe for the petitioners in WPL/1819/2024 and
WPL/1864/2024.
Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. D.J. Kakalia, Mrs. Bhavna
Singh Jaipuria and Mr. Paresh Patkar i/b. Mulla and Mulla & Craigie
Blunt & Caroe for the petitioners in WPL/1826/2024 and
WPL/2735/2024.
Mr. Venkatesh Dhond a/w. Hormuz Mehta i/b. J. Sagar Associates for the
respondent in WPL/1864/2024.
Mr. Hormuz Mehta i/b. J. Sagar Associates for the respondent in
WPL/1819/2024, WPL1826/2024 and WPL2735/2024.
_______________________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
DATED: 2 February, 2024
_______________________
Page 1 of 6
2 February, 2024
::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC
P.C.
Writ Petition (L) No. 1864/2024, 1826/2024 and 2735/2024
1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raise a common challenge, namely, to the orders passed against the petitioner by the respondent no. 1's Wilful Defaulter Identification Committee (for short "Identification Committee") constituted under the directives of the Reserve Bank of India contained under the RBI Master Circular on Willful Defaulters dated 1 July, 2015.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that a show cause notice was issued by the Identification Committee on which the petitioners had submitted their replies raising their respective contentions. On such notices, the impugned orders have been passed, whereby the Identification Committee has observed that the response of the petitioners to the show cause notice was not acceptable. It was hence decided to declare the petitioners as "willful defaulters" as per the RBI's directives for the reasons set out in the impugned orders. It is in these circumstances, the present petitions were filed inter alia raising contentions to the legality of the impugned orders as passed by the Identification Committee.
3. On behalf of respondent no. 1 it was contended that these petitions assailing the decision of the Identification Committee ought not to be Page 2 of 6 2 February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC entertained for the reason that the decision of the Identification Committee is not a final decision, as the final decision would be taken by the Review Committee, for which the petitioners are required to approach the said Committee, which would delve on all the issues on the contentions of the petitioners, and take an appropriate decision, in accordance with law which would be final.
4. On 18 January, 2024, the parties were heard on such issues when the Court passed the following order:
"1. We have heard Mr. Nankani and Mr. Seksaria, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. Dhond, learned Senior Counsel for Respondent/SBI.
2. We adjourn the proceedings to 29 January 2024, for appropriate orders to be passed on the petitions.
3. In the meantime, we accept the statement as made by Mr. Dhond, that the decision of the I dentification Committee as impugned in the present proceedings is not an order and is subject to the final decision which would be taken by the Review Committee, and for such reason, the same shall not in any manner be acted upon."
(emphasis supplied)
5. We may observe that the primary contention of the petitioners is of the prejudice being caused to the petitioners on account of the documents being not made available to the petitioners and more particularly, the Forensic Audit Report, which according to the petitioners was the basis, on which the impugned order was passed by the Identification Committee. We had accordingly adjourned the proceedings to enable respondent no. 1 to inform Page 3 of 6 2 February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC the Court as to whether a copy of the Forensic Audit Report can be provided to the petitioners so that after such report is available, the parties can be heard afresh by the Identification Committee and a fresh order can be passed.
6. It is on the above backdrop, we have heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. Considering the nature of the grievance as urged on behalf of the petitioners, in our opinion, it would be appropriate that the Forensic Audit Report, which forms the basis of the proceedings before the Identification Committee, be made available to the petitioners so that the grievance of the petitioners on not furnishing of the Forensic Audit Report would stand redressed. Thereafter by granting an opportunity to the petitioners to address their contentions, the Identification Committee can take an appropriate decision.
8. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice that the petitions are disposed of by the following order keeping open all contentions of the parties:-
Order
(i) The impugned order passed by the Identification Page 4 of 6 2 February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC Committee in each of the petitions stands quashed and set aside;
(ii) Respondent no. 1 is directed to provide to the petitioners Forensic Audit Report within a period of four days from today.
(iii) The petitioners shall have an opportunity to file a fresh reply to the show cause notice which be filed within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of such report is furnished to the petitioner, without any further extension to file the same.
(iv) Identification Committee shall hear the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date the petitioner's reply is filed, and shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date the petitioners are heard. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open
(v) Needless to observe that in the event the petitioners, after receipt of the Forensic Report, fail to file their reply and / or fail to appear at the hearing which may be fixed by the Identification Committee, in such event the Identification Committee is free to proceed and Page 5 of 6 2 February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::
902.WPL1819_2024.DOC pass appropriate orders, thereby drawing a presumption of the petitioners' non willingness on any of such aspects.
9. The petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
Writ Petition (L) No. 1819 of 2024
10. In this petition, the Identification Committee is yet to delve on the issue as arisen under the show cause notice. It is at such stage this petition is filed. We, therefore, keep open all contentions of the petitioners to appear before the Identification Committee including on the Forensic Audit Report, which shall also be furnished to the petitioners by respondent no. 1.
11. Disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
(FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI , J.) Page 6 of 6 2 February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/02/2024 07:08:47 :::