Dipankar Datta, J.—In view of the common issues involved in these two writ petitions, the same have been heard together. This Bench proposes to dispose of the same by this common judgment and order.

2. The case pleaded in W.P. 3989(W) of 2016 may be noted. The petitioner no. 1 is a private limited company while the petitioner no. 2 is one of its principal officers. The petitioner no. 1 was previously known as R. Piyarelall International Private Limited (hereafter Piyarelall). Since 2004, Piyarelall was availing credit facilities from the State Bank of India, respondent no. 1 (hereafter the SBI). Owing to defaults committed by the SBI, Piyarelall suffered loss and damages whereby its business was permanently impaired. A civil suit was instituted by Piyarelall claiming diverse relief. As a retaliatory measure, the SBI issued a notice dated November 27, 2014 threatening to include the name of Piyarelall in the list of wilful defaulters as provided for by the Reserve Bank of India (hereafter the RBI) in a document captioned “Master Circular for Wilful Defaulters” (hereafter the master circular). The said notice purported to convey to Piyarelall that if it had any grievance aga