Writs Against Banks - Generally, a writ petition cannot be maintained against private or scheduled banks for purely commercial or contractual disputes, as these banks do not perform public or statutory functions. However, writs may be issued against banks that carry out statutory or public duties, such as nationalized banks or banks performing functions mandated by law Murari Sarkar VS Union of India - Calcutta, Koneru Venu Madhav VS Kotak Mahindra Bank Private Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh, Kamruzzaman VS State of West Bengal - Calcutta.
Writs Against Public or Statutory Banks - Writ petitions are more likely to succeed against banks with public functions or statutory obligations. For example, government-owned banks or those performing functions under RBI regulations can be subject to judicial review through writs, especially when public interest or statutory duties are involved Authorised Officer, Stressed Assets Management Branch-1, State Bank Of India VS Kavita Marketing Private Limited - Calcutta, Sleebachan Charuvila Veedu v. State of Kerala - Kerala.
Issuance of Notices and Actions under SARFAESI Act - Banks can issue notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act to recover dues. The third notice issued under Section 13(2) was challenged in a case where the court allowed the writ petition, indicating that such notices can be subject to judicial review if procedural or statutory violations are alleged Authorised Officer, Stressed Assets Management Branch-1, State Bank Of India VS Kavita Marketing Private Limited - Calcutta.
Disciplinary and Other Actions - Actions like suspension or chargesheeting employees by banks are disciplinary matters, which are typically not subject to writ jurisdiction unless procedural irregularities or violation of statutory rights are proven Murari Sarkar VS Union of India - Calcutta.
Classification and Recovery of Accounts - Challenges to account classification or recovery measures (such as issuing possession notices or publishing notices) are generally not entertained through writs against private banks unless they perform public functions or violate statutory guidelines. For instance, classification as NPA or issuance of possession notices by scheduled banks are usually outside the scope of writ jurisdiction Hindustan Steel Works Construction Kolkata v. Banking Ombudsman - Gauhati, Koneru Venu Madhav VS Kotak Mahindra Bank Private Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh.
Foreign Banks - Writ petitions against foreign banks operating in India are generally not maintainable unless they perform functions akin to statutory/public duties. The license issued by RBI alone does not make such banks amenable to writ jurisdiction unless they are performing statutory functions Kamruzzaman VS State of West Bengal - Calcutta.
Circulars and Notices - Circulars issued by banks, including recall notices or circulars related to recovery, are subject to challenge if procedural violations or non-compliance with RBI guidelines are established. Courts have quashed circulars or notices when issued arbitrarily or without proper consideration Noorul Islam Trust vs State Bank Of India, Represented By Its Assistant General Manager - Kerala, Jyothi Laundry VS Union of India - Telangana.
Analysis and Conclusion:Writs can be issued against banks primarily when they perform public or statutory functions, such as nationalized banks or those carrying out RBI-mandated duties. Private and scheduled banks, engaged in purely commercial activities, are generally immune from writ jurisdiction unless they violate statutory obligations or procedural safeguards. Notices under SARFAESI or disciplinary actions are subject to judicial review if procedural irregularities or violations of law are demonstrated. Foreign banks are typically not amenable to writs unless performing statutory functions. Therefore, the ability to issue a writ against a bank depends on the nature of the bank's functions and the context of the action taken Authorised Officer, Stressed Assets Management Branch-1, State Bank Of India VS Kavita Marketing Private Limited - Calcutta, Sleebachan Charuvila Veedu v. State of Kerala - Kerala, Koneru Venu Madhav VS Kotak Mahindra Bank Private Ltd. - Andhra Pradesh, Noorul Islam Trust vs State Bank Of India, Represented By Its Assistant General Manager - Kerala.
