Telangana High Court
Talla Raghavendra vs Union Of India on 25 March, 2026
Author: Nagesh Bheemapaka
Bench: Nagesh Bheemapaka
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION No.8791 of 2026
25.03.2026
Between:
Talla Raghavendra
...Petitioner
AND
Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & 3 others
...Respondents
ORDER:
Heard Ms.Thakur Manaswini Singh, learned counsel representing Sri Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt N.V.R.Rajya Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel representing Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1. Perused the record.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is 2 squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18913 of 2024, dated 22.08.2024 and therefore, the same order may be passed in this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:
"8. In view of the above circulars, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to ensure that the agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly follow the guidelines and instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd Vs. Prakash Kaur's case (1 supra) and ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma's case (2 supra).
9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs."
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection.
4. Accordingly, in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18913 of 2024, dated 22.08.2024, and for the reasons alike, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities and their agents toscrupulously follow the guidelines/instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India in its Circular dated 12.08.2022 and also the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd.v. PrakashKaur' 1s case and 1 (2007) 2 SCC 711 3 ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma' 2s case, while recovering the loan amounts from the petitioner. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J Dated 25.03.2026 dgr 2 (2008) 7 SCC 532