Vemula Mahendra Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Vemula Mahendra Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of (following the order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024) with a direction to the respondent authorities to scrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions in the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022 and the Supreme Court judgments in ICICI Bank Ltd v. Prakash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma; disposal without costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 (ICICI Bank, SBI Card and Aditya Birla Capital) in attempting to recover amounts from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal and high-handed manner, without following due process of law and the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022, is violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, and whether the inaction of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in enforcing the said circular is unconstitutional.

Court's answer

In terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024, and for the reasons alike, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to scrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions in the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022, and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd v. Prakash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana (Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 filed by a borrower (Vemula Mahendra) against ICICI Bank, SBI Cards and Payments Services Ltd. and Aditya Birla Capital, alleging arbitrary, illegal and high-handed recovery attempts in violation of the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022 (No. RBI/2022-23/108, DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.04.158/2022-23) and Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, and of the inaction of the Union of India and the RBI in enforcing the circular. Holding the issue squarely covered by its earlier order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024 (which the respondents' counsel did not dispute), the Court disposed of the petition in like terms, directing the respondent authorities to scrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions in the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022 and the Supreme Court judgments in ICICI Bank Ltd v. Prakash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma (7 SCC 532), without costs.

[³³⁰⁰¹

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF^TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

PRESENT

THE H6NOURABLE SRIJUSTICE^{NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA}

WRIT PETITION NO:25830 OF²⁰²⁵

Between:

Vemula Mahendra, C/o. China Malakondaiah,^{Age- 28 years,Occ-Job-Searching'} R/o. H.No.368, Road l.lo.9, Vasanth Nagar,^{KPHB Colony, Hyderabad' Telangana -} 500085.

.....PETITIONER

AND

'1. Union of lndia, Represent by ifs Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi 2. Reserve Bank of lndia^(RBi), Represent^{by its Chief GeneralManager, 6,} Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001.

lclCl Bank, Rep. by its Chief^{Manager, lClCl Bank Towers,Financial} Qist' Plot No 12 Nan'akrinrguda, Gachidwli, Hyderabad,^{Telangana500032.}

SBI Cards and Payments Services^{Limited(SBl Card)., Rep. by its Chief} Manager, State Bink of lndia Credit Cards^{Unit Nos 3C 3D and3E 3rd Floor} Queeis Plaza 18382 Queens^{Plaza SP RoadSecunderabad Telangana-} 500003.

ADITYA BIRLA CAPITAL, Rep.^{by its ChiefManager, One World Center,} Tower 1 , 18th Floor, Jupiter Mills^{'Compound,841} '^{Senapati Bapat} Marg,Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-'l()0091.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition Under Article 226 of lhe^{constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affirlavit^{filedtherewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or^{Direction, moreparticularly in the} nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring^{the actionof respondentNos. 3 to 5 in} attempting to recover amounts from^{tfie petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal, and high-} handed manner without follcwing the due^{processof law and in blatant violationof} the Reserve Bank of lndia^{circular dated12.08.2022 beanngtto. RBU2022-231}

108, DOR.ORG.REC.65/21^{.04 .15812022-23, and further declaringthe inactionof} respondent l,lo. 2 in enforcing the^{saidCircular as unconstitutional and violativeof} Articles 14,^.19, and 21 of the^{constitutionof lndia, and consequently directthe} respondent authorities to^{refrain from undertakingany coercive or unlawful} recovery m€lasures against^{the petitionerand to strictly comply with the due} process of law and the aforesaid Circular in all^{recovery proceedings, and further} restrain respondent Nos. 3 to 5,^{their agents, recovery agents, executives,} managers, c r any^{person acting on theirbehalf fromengaging in any acts of} intimidation, harassment,^{humiliation,or intrusion into the privacy of the petitioner} or his famill' members,^{refereesor friends, including persistentor anonymous} calls, threaterning messages,^{or physicalvisits to the pQtitionefs premises,and} further direct respondent^{No. 2 to enforce the said RBI Circular in letter and spirit} and to initiate appropriate^{and stringentaction againstthe enant officials of} respondent llos. 3 to 5^{for violating legal nonns, and pending disposal of the writ} petition, direr:t the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 not to resort to any coercive^measures against the Fletitioner except^{throughlaMul means and in strict adherence to the} Circular dated¹ 2.O8.2022.

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{Ms.THAKURtIANASW}N!SINGH' REPRESENTING} SRI BONTHTI LOKESH^{PHANINDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE}

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1: SRIANGOTHU NEHRU (SC FOR CENTRAL} GOVT)

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.2: SRI K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY}

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.3& 4 :} '

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.S: SRI V.SANTOSH}

The Court made the following^ORDER

"--**-*]_t"

(-

1

THE HON'BLE sRr.rusrrcE NAGESH BrrEEruApAKA Ntl of

ORDER:

Heard Ms.Thakur Mar-raswini singh, learned counsel representing sri Bonthu Lokesh phanindra Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Angothu Nehru, learned Standing counsel for central Government, sri K.Rathanga pani Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and sri V.Santosh, learned counsel for respondent No.S. perused the record.

\

when the matter is taken up,for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that t]:q issue raised in this Writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this court in w.P.No.S2oo of 2024, dated 2s.o4.2o24 arrd, therefore, the s€une order may be passed in this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said ord.er read.s as under:

"8. For the aforesaid reasons and as the procedure adopted by the respondent Nos.4 to T tor recovery of loan amount from the petitioner, amounts to violation of the rights gua.anteed under Articles 14 and 2l of the Constitution of India, this Court deems it appropriate^' to direct the respondents, to ensure that tJ:e agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shalt Jt.ictly follow the guidelines and instmctions issued by the Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Suprerne Court in ICICI Bank Ltd VB. Prakash l(aur's case (l supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharmars case (2 supra).

2

I I

With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of."

Learned counsel for the respondents d.oes not dispute the submissj.ons of learned counsel for the petitioner.

In t:erms of the order passed by this court in w.p.No.520o of 2024, dated 25.04.2024, and for the reasons alike, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent ,4y$orities to scrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions in the RBI circular dated 12.08.2022, and also the judgments of Hon,ble supreme court in ICrcI Bank Ltd vs. prakash Kaur and, othersr and rcrcl Bank vs. shanti Devi sharma and, others2.

Pr-'nding miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

2 1 7 SCC; 532

REDDY

/ITRUE^COPYT'

SECTION^OFFICER

to

6 7. 8. 8IJJ,3^{to SRIK RATHAryGA^PAN| REDDY,Advocate(oPuc)}

e. one^{c.c to SRI V.b;NTOSH'Ad'o"'te(oPUC)}

10.Two^{C;D Copies}

SA w

HIGH COIURT

DATED:(t711012025

{HE
i: ? 4 JAr{ 2020
*

ORDER

WP.No.2:5830 of²⁰²⁵

DISPOSING^{OF THE W.P} WITHOLIT COSTS.

-.d(eA v X.