ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is a banking company established under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and is governed by the banking laws; More particularly, Banking Regulation Act, 1949. It is stated that the petitioner bank has an account with the respondent no.2 bank and the petitioner is provided with the cheque book by the respondent no.2 bank. The petitioner Bank is empowered to issue a Demand Draft (bankers cheque) as facilitated by the respondent no.2 bank and for issuing such Demand Draft, the respondent no.2 has provided its cheque book to the respondent no.1 bank.

2. It is further stated that one Shri Anil Patel had approached the petitioner Bank and had obtained the Demand Draft by depositing cash of Rs.500/- in favour of one Mr.P.K.Solanki drawn on Vapi branch of the respondent no.2 bank bearing Demand Draft No. 818969, dated 10.10.2012. It is also stated that Shri Anil Patel and the beneficiary of the Demand Draft in collusion with some of the officers of the respondent no.2 bank tempered with the said Demand Draft and fraudulently encashed Rs.8,75,500/ instead of Rs.500/-. It is stated that said amount came to be deducted from the account of petitioner Bank by the respondent no.2 bank. It is stated that the officers of the respondent no.2 bank without verifying the authenticity of the Demand Draft and without checking the Demand Draft under the ultraviolet lamp as mandated by law, proceeded to complete the transaction thereby fraudulently debiting Rs.8,75,500/- from the account of petitioner’s bank. It is stated that the petitioner Bank by Communication dated 29.10.2012 informed the respondent no.2 bank regarding the fraudulent act committed by the respondent no.2 bank. The respondent no.2 bank by Communication dated 05.12.2012, replied and informed the petitioner Bank that the respondent no.2 bank had filed police complaint with the Jaipur Police and awaiting the investigation to be completed and that thereafter necessary action would be taken. It is stated that the petitioner Bank was constrained to send legal notice to the respondent no.2 Bank and on 28.12.2012 calling upon the respondent Bank to give credit of Rs.8,75,500/- being amount, which was paid by the respondent no.2 bank against fake /tempered instrument which was never issued by the petitioner Bank. The petitioner Bank also lodged a complaint and informed the Reserved Bank of India - respondent no.1 herein, with regard to aforesaid fraudulent transaction by letter dated 22.01.2013. The Reserve Bank of India, the respondent no.1 by Communication dated 24.01.2014 informed the petitioner Bank that the respondent no.1 can be approached after investigation in the aforesaid matter is completed. The petitioner Bank by Communications dated 18.07.2014 and 03.08.2015 reiterated its request to the respondent Bank to reverse the amount / entry of Rs.8,75,500/-, which was paid by the Jaipur Branch of the Vijaya Bank in favour of one Shri Pravin Ajmera. The respondent no.2 Bank by Communication dated 28.08.2015, informed the petitioner Bank that the alteration in the cheque / Demand Draft was not visible to the naked eyes and also under ultraviolet lamp consequently the cheque no.818969 was cleared by the respondent no.2 bank. It was further informed that the petitioner Bank’s cheque of Rs.8,75,500/- was collected by the Vijaya Bank, Jaipur branch for its customer i.e. Pravin Ajmera from Mira Road, Thane. It was the Vijaya Bank who did not exercise (avail) due diligence. It is stated that the respondent no.1 Reserve Bank of India by Communication dated 04.09.2015 informed the petitioner Bank that complaint filed was treated as closed in view of the response given by the respondent no.2 bank.

3. Being aggrieved by the Communication dated 04.09.2015 by respondent no.1 as well as inaction on the part of the respondent no.1 Reserve Bank of India and respondent no.2, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by preferring present writ applicatio