Dande Naga Ajaykumar Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Dande Naga Ajaykumar Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024, directing respondent authorities and their agents to scrupulously follow 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 while recovering the loan amounts from the petitioner; no costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether recovery measures adopted by respondent Nos. 3 to 6 against the petitioner were arbitrary, illegal and violative of the RBI Circular dated 12.08.2022 and the due process of law (read with Articles 14, 19 and 21). +1 more

Court's answer

Accepting counsel's submission that the issue is squarely covered by this Court's order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024 (with no objection from learned Standing Counsel), the Court disposed of this writ petition in terms of that order and for the reasons alike.

Ratio / Principle

The respondent authorities and their agents are directed to scrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India in its Circular dated 12.08.2022, and the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Prakash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma, while recovering the loan amounts from the petitioner; no costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Telangana (Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.), 13-11-2025, disposed of Writ Petition No. 30145 of 2025 under Article 226 filed by a borrower alleging arbitrary, high-handed recovery attempts by ICICI Bank, SBI Cards, Standard Chartered Bank and IndusInd Bank 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, and of RBI's failure to enforce it. Finding the issue squarely covered by its earlier order in W.P.No.5200 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024, and there being no objection from the learned Standing Counsel, the Court disposed of the petition on like reasons, directing the respondent authorities and their agents to scrupulously follow the RBI Circular and the Supreme Court judgments in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Prakash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma while recovering the loan amounts; no costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

[³³⁰⁰ ]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND I/VENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITION NO: 30145 OF 2025

Between:

Dande Naga Ajaykumar, S/o Nageswara Rao Age. 27 Years, Occ. Job Searching, R/ o 1-1, Lingannapalem, Chandaluru, Darsichandalur, Darsi, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh - 5233C/. Pan Card No. DHAPD1518J

...PETITIONER

AND

Union of lndia, Represent by it's Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi 2. Reserve Bank of lndia (RBl), Represent by its Chief General Manager, G, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001

lclcl Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager, lClCl Bank Towers, Financial Dist, Plot No 12 Nanakramguda, Gachibowl[, Hyderabad, Telangana 500032

SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited (SBl Card)., Re-p. by its Chief M_a1q=ger, DLF Cyber City, Tower C, Block 2, Building 3 DLF lnfinity Towers, 12th Floor, Gurugram, HR - 122002

Standard Chartered Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager, C 38/39, G Block, Crescenzo Building, Bandra Kurla Complex-Bandrb (East), Mumbai - 400051, Maharastra

INDUSIND Bank Limited, Rep by its Chief Manager 2401, Gen. Thimmayya Road Cantonment, Pune, Maharashtra - 411 OOI

...RES'ONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent Nos. 3 to 6 in attempting to recover amounts from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal, and highhanded manner without following the due process of law and in blatant violation of the Reserve Bank of tndia Circular dated 12.08.2022 bearing No. RBlt2O222311O8, DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.O4.15812022-23, and further declaring the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said Circular as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the respondent authorities to refrain from undertaking any coercive or unlawful

,], .,,:^,:.

recovery rteasures against the^petitioner and to strictly^{complywith the due} process of law and the aforesaid Circular in all recovery^proceedings, and further restrain re:spondent Nos. 3 to 6, their agents,^{recovery agents,executives,} managers, or any person acting on their behalf from^{engagingin any acts of} intimidation, harassment, humiliation, or intrusion into^{the privacyof the petitioner} or his family members, referees or friends, including^persistent or^anonymous calls, threatening messages, or physical visits to the^{petitioner's premises, and} further dire,:t respondent No. 2 to enforce the said RBI Circular^{in letterandspirit} and to initiate appropriate and stringent action against the errant^officialsof respondent Nos. 3 to 6 for violating legal norms, and^{pending disposal of the writ} petition, direct the respondent Nos. 3 to 6 not to resort to any coercive measures against the petitioner except through laMul means and in strict^adherence to^the Circular daled 12.08.2022.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA^REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI SUDHARSHAN NARAHARI, SC^FOR tctct Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,4 TO 6: NONE APPEARED

The Court rnade the following: ORDER

f I

--1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITI,ON No.3O145 of 2or25.

ORDER:

Heard Mr.Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.Sudharshan Narahari, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the record.

Despite service of notice, none appeared for remaining respondents.

when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.S2OO of 2024, dated 25.04.2024 and therefore, the same order may be passed in this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

"8. For the aforesaid reasons and as the piocedure adopted by the respondent Nos.4 to 7 for recovery of loan amount from the petitioner, amounts to violation of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents, to ensure that the agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly follow the guidelines and instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur's case (1 supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shaati Devi Sharma's case (2 supra). 9. With the above said direction, tJre writ petition is disposed of."

Ia

Learned Standing counsel for the respondents have no objection to

the same

2

Accordingly, in terms of the order^{passed by this Court in} W.P.No.52OO of 2024, dated 25.04.2024,^{and for the reasonsalike, this} rvrit petition is d.isposed of directing^{the respondentauthoritiesand their} agents to s<:rupulously follow the^{guidelines/instructionsissued' by the} Reserve Barr.k of India in its Circular^{dated. 12.Oa.2O22and also the} judgments rtf Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd. v.^Prakash Kaur'ls cas,e and ICICI Bank v. Shanti^{Devi Sharma'2s case, while} recovering t;ee loan amounts from the^{petitioner.No costs.}

Penrling miscellaneous applications, if^{any, shall stand closed.}

Sd/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI TANT REGISTRAR

/TRUE COPYII

I \

\

SECTION OFFICER

To 1. The Secretary, Union of lndia ew Delhi The Chief General Manager, of ln (RBl),6, Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110001

The Chief Manager, lClCl Bank, lclcl Bank Towers, Financial Dist, Plot No 1 2 N{anakramguda, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana 500032

The Chief Manager, SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited^(SBl Card)., DLF Cyber City, Tower C, Block 2, Building 3 DLF lnfinity Towers, 12th Floor, Gurugram, HR - 122002

The Chief Manager, Standard Chartered Bank, C 38/39, G Block, Crescenzo Builcling, Bandra Kurla Complex-Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051, Maharastra.

The Chief Manager 2401,lNDUS|ND Bank Limited, Gen. Thimmayya Road Canl:onment, Pune, Maharashtra - 411 001

One CC to SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndier Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to SRI SUDHARSHAN NARAHARI, SC FOR lClcl IOPUC] 10.Two CD Copies

PSK.k

t(2007)zscc7iL 2 (2008) 7 SCC 5:i2

.: ii E It$\

,i;^,.,.:,,'.

\ -t

t :iI I l

L c I Itt

HIGH C}OURT

DATEET:1311112025

ORDER

WP.No.30145 of 2025

**.
1 HES
i-v
C)
L) n ? lil" lnlg
*
i:rara\J-
-i.]"

DISPO.SING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHO'UT COSTS

d&
\v
5