1. - Since on same set of facts, similar issues have been raised, all these writ petitions are decided by this common order.

2. For the purpose of appreciating arguments of all the parties, we have taken D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4333/2010 - 21st Century Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and others as leading writ petition with the consent of all the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The aforesaid writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

"(i) The section 11(4) and section 11(B) of the Securities & Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for short 'the SEBI Act') be declared invalid and ultra vires to the Constitution of India.

(ii) The impugned order dated 8.3.2010 passed by the respondent No.2 being illegal and arbitrary be quashed and set aside.

(iii) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records and papers pertaining to the impugned order and investigation of the respondent No.2 in the matter of Bank of Rajasthan.

(iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly also be issued in favour of the petitioner."

4. Perusal of aforesaid reveals that while challenging the order dated 8.3.2010 passed by the respondent No.2 - Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short 'the SEBI'), the constitutional validity of Sections 11(4) & 11(B) of the SEBI Act has also been challenged.

5. The petitioners are aggrieved by an ad-interim ex-parte order dated 8.3.2010 passed by the SEBI restraining them from accessing security market and prohibiting from buying, selling and dealing in the securities in any manner whatsoever till further orders. Aforesaid order dated 8.3.2010 is under challenge mainly on the ground that same is without jurisdiction and offend fair play apart from violation of principles of natural justice. By the interim order, harsh and excessive penalty has been imposed upon the petitioners. The directions in the impugned order are in respect of shareholding in the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. The property of the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. is situated in the State of Rajasthan apart from its registered office. The part of cause of action thereof arose in the State of Rajasthan.

6. It is urged that on 20.2.2005, the Reserve Bank of India (for short 'the RBI') came out with certain guidelines viz. Guidelines on Ownership and Governance in Private Sector Banks (hereinafter referred to as 'the RBI Guidelines' for the short). The RBI Guidelines, inter-alia, require private sector banks to ensure that ultimate ownership and control of private sector banks is well diversified. The objective of the same was to ensure that no single entity or group of related entities has shareholding or control, directly or indirectly, in any bank in excess of 10 per cent of the paid-up capital of the private sector bank. Where ownership is that of a corporate entity, no single individual/entity has ownership and control in excess of 10 per cent of that entity. Pursuant to the aforesaid Guidelines, promoter shareholding in the bank was to be reduced to the extent indicated above. The promoter accordingly diversified their shareholding, though the RBI Guidelines are not statutory in character. The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. had disclosed to the Stock Exchanges regarding decrease in the promoter shareholding. The RBI, however, recorded that the Bank of Rajasthan has made incorrect disclosures regarding shareholding pattern led by Mr. Pravin Kumar Tayal and others. The RBI thereafter, made a reference to SEBI based on observations set up under their AFI Report showing that reported reduction by the promoter did not appear to be correct. The SEBI thereupon, made so-called investigation followed by passing of the impugned order. The impugned order mainly discloses allegations regarding incorrect disclosures to Stock Exchange