Bombay High Court
State Bank Of India, Mumbai ... vs Adjudicating Officer, Principal ... on 13 June, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
Judgment 1 wp4143.14.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4143 OF 2014
1. State Bank of India,
having Local Head Office at "Synergy",
Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051
through General Manager.
2. State Bank of India,
Mahal Branch, Near Khadi Gramodyog,
Mahal, Nagpur - 440 002.
.... PETITIONERS.
// VERSUS //
1. Adjudicating Officer,
Principal Secretary (Information Technology),
Government of Maharashtra,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.
2. Shri Prashant Mahadeorao Buradkar,
Aged about 45 years, R/o. Block No.6,
Kaveri, MSEB Colony, Navi Mumbai-400 708.
3. Vodafone Essar Ltd.,
Peninsula Corporate Park,
Ganpatrao Kadam Marg,
Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013.
.... RESPONDENTS
.
___________________________________________________________________
Shri S.N.Kumar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Shri K.R.Lule, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
None for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : JUNE 13, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Judgment 2 wp4143.14.odt
1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The respondent No.2 filed complaint before the respondent
No.1-Adjudicating Officer contending that the sim-card issued by the
respondent No.2 was defective and was misused and an amount of
Rs.10,50,000/- was illegally withdrawn from his account. The Adjudicating
Authority by order dated 2nd July, 2013 upheld the complaint of the
respondent No.2 and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.6,00,000/- and
respondent No.3 to pay Rs.6,00,000/- to the respondent No.2. This order is
challenged by the petitioner before Cyber Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.
The petitioners also sought interim order. The respondent No.3 also
challenged the order passed by the respondent No.1 Adjudicating Authority
before the Cyber Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. As the Appellate Tribunal
was not functioning, the respondent No.3 filed petition before the High Court
of Delhi in which interim order came to be passed. The petitioners have
approached this Court also with similar grievance that their appeal and the
application praying for interim order is not being taken up by the Cyber
Appellate Tribunal as it is not functioning. This Court by order dated 19th
August, 2014 directed issuance of notice and stayed the effect and operation
of the order passed by the respondent No.1-Adjudicating Authority on
condition that the petitioners deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with the
Registry of this Court.
Judgment 3 wp4143.14.odt
4. The learned advocate for the petitioners states that the amount
of Rs.2,00,000/- has been deposited with the Registry of this Court. It is
further submitted that the person who had withdrawn the amount from the
account of the respondent No.2 has been identified and charge-sheet is filed
against him and the amount of Rs.2,04,866/- has been recovered from him
and restored in the account of respondent No.2. The learned advocate for
the petitioner has pointed out the order passed by the High Court of Delhi on
26th April, 2016 recording statement of A.S.G. that Chairperson of the Cyber
Appellate Tribunal was likely to be appointed by the end of May, 2016.
5. Considering the facts of the case, in my view, the petition can
be disposed of by following order :
i) The effect, operation and execution of the order passed by
the respondent No.1-Adjudicating Authority is stayed till the
Cyber Appellate Tribunal starts functioning and considers the
application filed by the petitioners for interim order.
ii) This order shall not affect the entitlement of the respondent
No.2 regarding amount of Rs.2,04,866/- restored in his
account by the petitioners.
Judgment 4 wp4143.14.odt
iii) The amount deposited by the petitioners be returned to the
petitioners along with interest, if any. This refund will be
subject to filing of undertaking by the petitioners that if the
petitioners failed in the challenge before the Cyber Appellate
Tribunal the petitioners shall pay interest @ 9% per annum
to the respondent No.2 on the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-
deposited before this Court.
The petition is disposed in the above terms. In the
circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.
JUDGE
RRaut..
