' ,'.TI '' j, il[i, :Ifl[

i !,11o, o o, o 'fi1i3Y,H,1:'ilJ1.^H?,i4,v,",r#"

PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF :;:f:l ,, ;SJ =, o*, ".- r Between:

WRIT PETITION NO:17500 0 F 2019 Mr srgnaR ta uj re es h O nA eg ,a Brw toa cl k, BS ,/ o

3 rL da Fte ro S ora , ty na on aa o.r a r.y ioan + ,A ;g :a .;rw ;;a ;l , HA ig lse ,d H a yb do eu rat.

b

4 ad7 _y e 50a 0rs 0, 3

4R/o AND .,,PETITIONER

1 State Bank of lndia, Reo. hy^its.Deputy t-r+-totira' r't lr, c4a ana cg le "r, i 'S st ire ;;s sed Assets lVanagement f,iil?lr;li ?|r" Froo', Bus Station, Kachisuda, 2 Reserve Bank of lndia, Rep. by its Manager,6-1-56, Secretariat Road, National Highway - 65, Saifabad, Khairt;bad, Hyaui"oli _ soci doo.

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 or rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue a writ, order or direction, particurarry one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus. i) Declaring the action of Respondent No. .1 in declaring the petitioner as a- wilful Defaulter and including the name of the petitioner in the list of wilful Defaulters vide communication dated 07 to}l2olg intimating the order of the ldentification committee and the Review committee dated 28.05.20.19 (which have not been served on the Petitioner) as illegal, arbitrary, u ncon stitutio na I and in violation of the principles of natural justice apart from being contrary to the procedure prescribed by the RBI as upheld by the Honorable Supreme Court of lndia and set aside the same, ii) Consequently direct the Respondents to strike off the name of the Petitioner from the list of Wilful Defaulters in the records of the Respondents.

lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Sectlon 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Coud may be pleased to stay all further proceedings / actions pertaining to declaring the Petitioner as a Wilful Defaulter including the Orders of the ldentification Committee and the Review Committee dated 281051201 9 (which have not been served on the Petitioner) and the communication dated 0710812019 intimating the same pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. TARUN G. REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: M/s. PEARL LAW ASSOCIATES Counsel for Respondent No.2: --

The Court made the following: ORDER Item No.6 KOHLI THE HON' LE THE F TICE AND THEHON,BLE SRI JUSTICEB. VIJAYSEN REDDY w. .No.175 oF2019 ORDER: @er the Hon'ble the ChieJ Jusrice Hima Kohli)

1. The present petition has been filed by the pe'itroner praying inter alia for declaring as illegal' the action of the respondent No. l/State Bank of lndia in declaring him as a wilflrl defaulter and including his name in the list of Wilful D elaulters' vide communication dated 07.08.2019. The petitioner has also challenged the order of the Identification Committee and the Re riew Committee dated 28.05.2019, which as per the averments mrde in the writ petition, was never served on him.

2. We may note that 1n SBI v. Jah. Develo L,td. reported as 2llg 6 SCC ?87, on examining the Master Cir:ular on Wilful Defaulters dated 01.07.2013 and Revised circular dated 01.07.2015, the Supreme Court has held that thc Committee c'rnlprising of the Executive Director and two other Senior oftlcers being the First Committee. must fumish the order passed by it to the borroweL as soon as the same is made to enable the borrower to represent against such an order within a period o1' fifteen days to the Review committee. This is in terms of the procedure prescribed in para 3 (b)

of the Revised Circular dated 01.07'2015.

tugelof3 IY.P. No.17500 of2019

3.

On enquiring fi.orn Ieamed counsel for the respondent No. I/SBI as to whether a copy of the decision of the First comlnittee was fumished to the petitioner/borower, he states that the decision of the Review Committee dated 2g.05.201 9 was communicared to the petitioner on the very next day, which submission is however disputed by le