Disposed

M. Vivek v. the Reserve Bank of India(Rbi)

Madras HC10 Apr 2023WP(MD)/3264/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, Justice P.T.Asha observed that a complaint by the petitioner had been registered with the Thiruvaiyaru Police. The Court directed the police respondents to complete the investigation expeditiously within three months and disposed of the writ petition with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Police respondents to complete investigation within three months; Writ Petition disposed of with no costs.

M. Vivek Vs the Reserve Bank of India(Rbi) — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

M.Vivek

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Reserve Bank of India (RBI),

¶11

6, Sansad Marg Area, New Delhi-110 001.

¶12

2.The Secretary, Union of India,

¶13

Ministry of Communication and Information Technology,

¶14

Sankar Bhawan, No.20, Asoha Road,

¶15

New Delhi-110 001.

¶16

3.The Secretary, Ministry of Telecom and

¶17

Information Technology,

¶18

Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶19

4.The District Collector, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur District.

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

_________Page 1 of 6

¶22

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶23

5.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶24

6.The Sub Inspector of Police, Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk, Thanjavur District.

¶25

7.The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Mahanagar Door Sanchar Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marge (Old Minto Road), New Delhi-110 002.

¶26

8.A.Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, Owner and Business Head, CASHBEAN mobile app (namely registered PC financial services p. Ltd.),

¶27

32-B, Pocket 'A' Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi-110 025.

¶28

.. Respondents

¶29

Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 7 to take appropriate actions against the 8^th respondent and his mother institution and his men and ban the CASHBEAN mobile app which was stealing the borrower's personal data, blackmail and digital kanthuvati platform and take necessary action by considering the petitioner's representations dated 08.01.2020 and 15.01.2020 within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court and pass an order directing to the 8^th respondent to pay the petitioner, compensation of mental sufferings a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs).

¶30

Page 2 of 6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶33

For Petitioner	:	Mr.M.Vivek (Party-in-person)
For RR1 & 2	:	Mr.P.Paul Pandi Senior Panel Counsel
For RR3 to 6	:	Mr.T.Amjadkhan Government Advocate
For R7	:	Mr.S.Jeyasingh Senior Panel Counsel

¶34

ORDER

¶35

This writ petition is filed for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 7 to take appropriate action against the 8^th respondent and ban the CASHBEAN app, take necessary action by considering the petitioner's representations dated 08.01.2020 and 15.01.2020 and further, direct the 8^th respondent to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) towards compensation for the mental sufferings.

¶36

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate informed the Court that the petitioner has lodged

¶37

_________Page 3 of 6

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶40

a complaint which has now been registered and is pending investigation on the file of the Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Thanjavur.

¶41

Considering the nature of the complaint which could involve other innocent parties as well, a direction is issued to respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶42

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

¶43

costs.

¶44

10.04.2023

¶45

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes

¶46

abr

¶47

_________Page 4 of 6

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶50

¶51

1.The Reserve Bank of India (RBI),

¶52

6, Sansad Marg Area, New Delhi-110 001.

¶53

2.The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology,

¶54

Sankar Bhawan, No.20, Asoha Road, New Delhi-110 001.

¶55

3.The Secretary, Ministry of Telecom and Information Technology,

¶56

Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶57

4.The District Collector, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶58

5.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶59

6.The Sub Inspector of Police, Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk, Thanjavur District.

¶60

7.The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Mahanagar Door Sanchar Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marge (Old Minto Road), New Delhi-110 002.

¶61

_________Page 5 of 6

¶62

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶63

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶64

P.T.ASHA, J.

¶65

abr

¶66

W.P.(MD) No.3264 of 2020

¶67

Dated: 10.04.2023

¶68

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶69

_________Page 6 of 6

M. Vivek v. the Reserve Bank of India(Rbi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Vivek v. the Reserve Bank of India(Rbi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Leon Jesurethnam Vs the Sub Collector

Sheik Ameerali Vs the Superintending Engineer

G.Rengasamy Vs the District Collector

Sri Madurai Meenakshi Infrastructure Development Company Vs the Commissioner

Senthil Kumar Vs the Principal Secretary

T.S.Kalyanasundar Vs the Chair Person