JUDGMENT :

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Vipulkumar M. Asodiya waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.1. Learned advocate Mr. Amar Bhatt waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.2.

2. Having regard to the controversy involved in the present case which lies in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

“(a) To issue necessary direction to Respondent No 1, to refund the pre payment charges of Rs. 10,06,246 levied by the bank to the petitioner herein being violative of norms and guidelines prescribed by the RBI.

(b) To pass such other and further orders as may be deem fit and proper.”

4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner availed financial assistance from respondent no.1 – Small Industrial Development Bank of India (For short “SIDBI”) of Rs. 300 lakhs being term loan and Rs. 150 lakhs being Cash Credit facili