Delhi High Court
M/S Transmoney Express P. Ltd. vs Reserve Bank Of India on 30 August, 2016
#R-23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 30.08.2016
W.P.(C) 1391/2005
M/S TRANSMONEY EXPRESS P. LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajat Malhotra, Advocate with
Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocate
Versus
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. H.S. Harihar, Advocate with Mr.
K.S. Parihar, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
assails an order dated 08.01.2005 and seeks a writ of certiorari to set aside
and quash the same.
2. The impugned letter dated 08.01.2005 is extracted hereinbelow:-
"RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, NEW DELHI LETTER HEAD
FE.DEL.FMX/8409MTSS (Transmoney)/2004-05 January 08, 2005
(Circular etc. issued under FEMA are available on our webside:
www.fema.rbi.org.in)
REGISTERED POST
M/s Transmoney Express Pvt. Ltd.
D-4, Chander Shekhar Road,
Laxmi Nagar,
New Delhi-110092.
W.P. (C) 1391/2005 Page 1 of 3
Dear Sir,
Money Transfer Service Scheme (MTSS) -
In association with M/s Transcheq
Express Inc., U.K.
--------------------------
Please refer to our letter EC.DEL.FMD No.418/Transmoney
(MTS)/2002-03 dated 03.12.2002 vide which we had renewed our
approval for carrying Money Transfer Services Scheme upto 10.11.2003.
In this connection, we advise that the credit rating report of your
overseas principal viz. Transcheq Express Inc. UK, is not found
satisfactory and also in view of the grave irregularities observed during
the inspection of your MTSS operations, you are advised to exit from the
arrangement with M/s Transcheq Express Inc., UK, and wind up your
operations with the overseas company by January 31, 2005 under advise
to us. You are also advised to return to us the original MTSS approval
letter dated November 11, 1999 issued to you by our Central Office,
Mumbai.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(M. Mukherjee)
Asst. General Manager
PSN/C-6/fmd"
3. A plain reading of the impugned letter dated 08.01.2005 reveals that
inter alia on the foundation of grave irregularities, observed by the Reserve
Bank of India, during the inspection of Money Transfer Service Scheme
(MTSS) operation of the petitioner, the latter were advised to exit from the
arrangement that they had with M/s Transcheq Express Inc., U.K. and wind
up their operations with the said overseas company by 31.01.2005. The
approval granted to the petitioner to carry out MTSS operation was
essentially withdrawn.
4. Mr. Kuldeep Parihar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Reserve
Bank of India invites my attention to the Payment and Settlement Systems
Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') to urge that the present
petition has been rendered infructuous, inasmuch as, w.e.f. 12.08.2007 any
person desirous of commencing or carrying of a payment system is required
to apply afresh to the Reserve Bank of India for an authorization under the
said Act.
5. Mr. Rajat Malhotra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner states that he would be satisfied, if the Court were to direct the
Reserve Bank of India to consider its proposed application, when filed, for
authorization under the provisions of the said Act to commence a payment
system, in accordance with law, without being influenced by the proceedings
that led to the passing of the impugned letter dated 08.01.2005.
6. Mr. Kuldeep Parihar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Reserve Bank of India states that the petitioner is at liberty to apply afresh,
in accordance with law, for authorization under the said Act, to commence a
payment system and that such an application when filed, shall be disposed
of, strictly in accord with the provisions of the said Act.
7. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, permitting the
petitioner to apply for authorization to commence a payment system, in
accordance with law, within a period of six months from today and the
Reserve Bank of India is directed to dispose of that application, within the
period stipulated in the said Act, without in any manner being influenced by
the proceedings that culminated in the passing of the impugned letter dated
08.01.2005.
8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
9. Dasti.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
AUGUST 30, 2016
dn
