ORDER :

Satish Chandra Sharma, J.

1. Regard being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the present cases, the writ petitions were analogously heard and by this common order, they are being disposed of by this Court.

2. The petitioner is common in all the three writ petitions. The facts of W.P.No.22588 of 2019 reveals as follows:-

The petitioner, a company registered under the Companies Act, has filed the present writ petitions being aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.3/Andhra Bank (now merged with Union Bank of India) in declaring the petitioner’s account as ‘fraud’ and is also aggrieved by the Master Circular issued by the Reserve Bank of India, dated 01.07.2016 as violative of principles of natural justice and fair play.

3. The petitioner has prayed the following reliefs:

“In these circumstances and for the reasons stated above, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an order or direction or any other proceedings one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3rd respondent in declaring the petitioner as ‘Fraud’ as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to ‘Master Directions on Frauds – Classification and Reporting by commercial banks and select FIs dated 01.07.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent, and further declaring the ‘Master Directions on Frauds – Classification and Reporting by commercial banks and select FIs dated 01.07.2016 as violative of principles of natural justice and consequently to set aside the decision of the 3rd respondent Bank and the impugned circular, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

It is further prayed that pending the disposal of the writ petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay all proceedings consequential to the action of the 3rd respondent in declaring the petitioner as ‘Fraud’ and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

It is further prayed that pending the disposal of the writ petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to produce the record of proceedings in which the petitioner was declared as ‘Fraud’ and share a copy of the same with the petitioner, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

4. The facts, as stated in the writ petition, reveal that the petitioner company is involved in the business of manufacture of edible oils and fats, rice and rava products and is having two manufacturing facilities in the State of Telangana as well as in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner company from 2003 to 2015 sought credit facilities from a consortium of banks with Andhra Bank (now merged with Union Bank of India) as a Lead Banker for a sum of Rs.675 crores. The petitioner company was declared as Non Performing Asset (NPA) on 14.05.2018 with effect from 31.03.2018. The petitioner company has further stated that after the account of the petitioner company became NPA, the consortium of lenders in the JLF Meeting dated 10.08.2018 proposed to conduct forensic audit of the petitioner company for the period till 31.03.2019. The petitioner company, as stated, has submitted all the requisite information as required by the forensic auditor appointed in the matter from time to time and it is the contention of the petitioner company that no adverse observations or detection of fraud activity by the petitioner company was noticed in the forensic audit. However, the respondent No.3 Bank kept on pushing the auditor to look deeper into the books so that the petitioner company is declared as ‘fraud’. It has also been stated that the respondent No.3 Bank also initiated recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and finally an e-mail dated 23.09.2019 was initiated by Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited to