HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
&
HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER
WP No.4943 of 2021
ORDER::
This writ petition is filed seeking issue a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus to set aside the letter dated 06-11-2020 issued by the respondent-bank in respect of the petitioner loan account No. 5539066500000069 as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent-bank to consider the OTS application dated 29-09-2020 in terms of Circular No. 2218/2020, dated 29-09-2020 in the interest of justice.
02. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that rejection of petitioner's application for settlement of loan account under OTS scheme on the ground that the loan account is ineligible under the guidelines issued vide Circular No.2218/2020 dated 29-09-2020, without disclosing any reasons is unsustainable in law. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner's loan account is eligible for revival/restructing under the OTS scheme. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits that as per the guidelines issued under the Circular No.2218/2020, dated 29-09-2020, petitioner's case 2 was considered and as his loan account was not eligible, the impugned order has been passed, the same cannot be faulted.
03. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in MOHINDER SINGH GILL vs. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER, (1978 1 SCC 405), at para 8 of the judgment held thus:-
"It is true that when an order is passed, be it administrative or quasi-judicial in nature, necessarily it would contain grounds or reasons for invalidating the action taken. The authorities cannot subsequently explain their actions by way of affidavit or otherwise. Therefore, this Court insisted upon the public orders made in exercise of the statutory power, should contain reasons and the order should contain the kind of action taken by them. Therefore, they cannot be permitted to substitute their actions or contents of orders by reference to any affidavits or other actions which did not find place in the order."
04. The perusal of the impugned order goes to show that the respondent-bank except referring to the above said Circular, stated no reasons for rejection of the petitioner's application under the OTS scheme. OTS scheme is a benefit evolved by the RBI under which the eligible bad debt loan account holders are entitled for settlement under the scheme. Non speaking order shadows the decision taken howsoever correct. In the circumstnaces, the impugned order is set aisde and the respondent-bank is directed to 3 consider the OTS application of the petitioner afresh and pass appropraite orders thereon in accordance with law. It is needless to observe that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. The writ pettiion is allowed to the extent indicated above. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J _________________________ Dr.SHAMEEM AKTHER,J Dated: 16-03-2021 NRG 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY & HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER WP No.4943 of 2021 Dated: 16-03-2021 NRG