Himachal Pradesh High Court
M/S Gvm Resorts vs Reserve Bank Of India & Anr on 11 August, 2023
Author: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
SHIMLA
CWP No. 5103 of 2023
Decided on: 11.08.2023
M/s GVM Resorts
.
........Petitioner
Versus
Reserve Bank of India & Anr.
.......Respondents
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA, JUDGE
of
WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? No
For the petitioner : Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Mr. Aalok
Jagga and Mr. Harkirat S. Jagdev,
rt Advocates.
For the respondents : Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:
"i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing letter dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure P-35) and reply dated 08.06.2023 (Annexure P-39) vide which the bank had declined the restructuring proposal of the petitioner with a further prayer that the Bank be directed to obtain a fresh Techno Economic Viability Report after considering all relevant and recent aspects.::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2023 20:39:26 :::CIS 2
ii) It is still further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Bank to constitute the rehabilitation committee .
as per clause 3.3 of RBI guidelines dated 17.03.2016 titled as Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) (Annexure P-41) and thereafter refer the matter of the petitioner to the Designated Committee provided as per Clause 3.3 of the said guidelines.
of
iii) It is still further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction holding the action of the bank in rt retrospectively declaring the loan account of the petitioner as NPA to be illegal."
3. The relief as claimed cannot be granted by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction, as has been repeatedly held by this Court in a number of decisions rendered by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 4831 of 2023, titled M/s Kartik Food vs. State of H.P. & Anr, decided on 01.08.2023, CWP No.4538 of 2023, titled M/s Neelkanth Yarn vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors, decided on 02.08.2023 and CWP No. 5045 of 2023 M/s Dynamic Sales vs. District Magistrate, Solan & Ors, decided on 03.08.2023, wherein the Court has held that the writ petition regarding any of the matter ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2023 20:39:26 :::CIS 3 which is covered by the SARFEASI Act would not be maintainable and the same would be maintainable before the DRT. It has further been held that the said DRT can go .
into the aspect of classifying of the account of the petitioner as NPA and also whether the RBI guidelines have been violated on the aspect leading to declaring of the account as NPA.
of
4. It shall be apt to produce the relevant observations as contained in para 27 to 29 of the judgment rt rendered in CWP No. 4538 of 2023, titled M/s Neelkant Yarn vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors, decided on 02.08.2023, which reads as under:-
"27 From the statutory scheme and decisions noted here-inabove, it is clear that this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction, cannot go into the decision of respondent-bank in classifying the petitioner's account as NPA. If the respondent-bank proceeds further and reaches Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act stage, the petitioner-firm can file application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The DRT can go into the aspect of classifying the account as NPA and also whether RBI guidelines have been violated on any aspect leading to declaring the account as NPA and taking recourse under the SARFAESI Act.
28. It has also been repeatedly held that the aspect of classifying an account as NPA is not justiciable in exercise of power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.
29. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the instant petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed leaving open to the petitioner- firm to avail remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act as and when Section 13(4) thereof is ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2023 20:39:26 :::CIS 4 invoked by the respondent-Bank. However, it is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all issues are left open to be urged before the competent authority. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. The parties are left to bear their own costs."
.
5. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the instant petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed, leaving open to the petitioner-firm to raise all points before DRT. However, of it is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all issues are left open to be urged rt before the competent authority. Leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge August 11, 2023 (himani) ::: Downloaded on - 11/08/2023 20:39:26 :::CIS