both in case if the OTS Policy is of the Bank or by the R.B.I It does not make any difference whether the OTS Policy is of the RBI Rather, in the present case, when the OTS proposal is of the Bank, it is completely enforceable. The Bank cannot raise an argument that OTS proposal of the Bank can Permit discrimination whereas that of RBI will not permit Further, RBI has stopped framing any OTS proposal for the Banks for last more than 10 years. Thus, it is the positive contention of the applicant that the legal issue raised by the Bank, is completely misplaced and where there is violation of fundamental rights of the applicant, that is discrimination by not following the OTS proposal framed by the Bank and adopting pick and choose manner, the power of D.R.T., cannot be curtailed to be treated to have restricted to a limited extent of examining only Section 13 (4) measures. Moreover in the case of Authorized Officer, Indian Overseas Bank v. M/s. Ashok Saw Mill., 2009 (8) SCC 366, the Hon'ble Supreme expanded the scope of the jurisdiction of D.R.T., by holding that even though Section 17 provides D R T. to examine measures U/s 13 (4), but that does not restrict examining even the measures of the sale. Therefore, Section 17 cannot be given a restrictive meaning.
