M/S Sardar Associates & Ors vs Punjab & Sind Bank & Ors on 31 July, 2009
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
course pursued by the respondent Bank is per se wrong and
illegal, being arbitrary in all respects. It is stated that, the
W.P.C. Nos. 14435, 18146
& 19527 of 2012 -11-
dispensation of service is only in respect of 'Individual' Business
Facilitators; while, corporate entities are sought to be retained,
mainly as a matter of convenience for the bank. The very
purpose of the Scheme behind the policy decision taken by the
Government is to extend/outreach the banking facility to the
rural folk, giving attention on individual/family basis, which
cannot be properly catered to, by the corporate entities. It is also
stated that, very huge target was fixed by the respondent Bank
as borne by Ext.P7, to be satisfied by 'Individual' Business
Facilitators. Their service has been quite unceremoniously
dispensed with, for vague reason, which does not have any legal
or factual basis. All other Banks in India are giving effect to the
policy decision and guidelines like Exts.P1 to P4 and the SBI
cannot take exception, to make things easy for them. Reliance is
also sought to be placed on the decision rendered by the Apex
Court in Sardar and Others v. Punjab & Sind Bank & Others
(2009 (8) SCC 257); pointing out that the RBI is empowered to
issue directions under the relevant statute and by virtue of
Section 21(3) of the Banking Regulations Act 1979, all the Banks
are bound to follow the same. Interception made by different
High Courts of India, as borne by Exts. P14 to P16 orders
W.P.C. Nos. 14435, 18146
& 19527 of 2012 -12-
granting interim stay, is also sought to be pressed in, to contend
that the course being followed by the SBI is nothing but arbitrary
and is liable to be interfered.