Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/80/2026 of Padarthi Srihari Vs Union of India on 30 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO: 80/2026 Between: 1. PADARTHI SRIHARI, S/O.P.SUBBARAMAIAH, AGE 40 YEARS, PRIVATE
APHC010705202025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO: 80/2026
Between:
1. PADARTHI SRIHARI, S/O.P.SUBBARAMAIAH, AGE 40 YEARS, PRIVATE
EMPLOYEE,
R/O.000,
PATHA
VELLANTI,
RANGASWAMIGUDI, VELLANTI, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, AP-
524309.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE ROOM-NO74-B, NEW DELHI - 110001 (INDIA).
2. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, - REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR 2ND FLOOR, CENTRAL OFFICE BUILDING, BHARAT
SINGH MARG, MUMBAI. - 400 001
3. HDFC BANK LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, OFFICE AT
RETAIL LOAN SERVICE CENTRE, 2ND FLOOR, D.NO.10/03/207
AND 208, RAMALINGAPURAM MAIN ROAD, NELLORE, SPSR
NELLORE DISTRICT,AP-524001.
4. TATA NEU INFINITY HDFC BANK CREDIT CARD, REP BY ITS
MANAGER, OFFICE AT THE MANAGER, HDFC BANK CARDS
DIVISION, DOOR NO.94 SP, ESTATE BUS STAND, WAVIN MAIN
ROAD, MOGAPPAIR WEST,CHENNAI-600058.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 3 and 4 in trying to recover the loan amounts from the petitioner by sending recovery agents to the residence and office of the petitioner without following Circular issued by the respondent no.2 vide RBI/202223/
108 DOR ORG REC 65/ 21 04 158/202223dated 12.08.2022 as illegal, arbitrary and against Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the Respondents Nos.3 and 4 to forth with stop sending recovery agents to the Petitioner's residence and to duly follow Circular issued by the respondent no.2 vide RBI/202223/108 DOR ORG REC 65/ 21
04 158/202223 dated 12.08.2022 while recovering loans that may be due to them IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased direct the respondent no.3 and 4 not to take any coercive measures against the petitioner without following due process of law and mandatorily following Circular dated 12.08.2022 vide RBI/2022 23/108,DOR ORG REC
65/21 04 1 58/20222 issued by respondent no 2 pending disposal of the writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MEDARA SIVA PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. MANNAM VENKATA KRISHNA RAO
2. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN ( SC FOR CENT GOVT) )
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.80 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. T. Niranjan, learned counsel for the respondent No.1, Mr. M.V. Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and perused the material available on record. In spite of service of notice, there is no representation for the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. In an identical circumstances, this Court by order dated 17.03.2026 in W.P.No.7435 of 2026 issued the following directions: “8. For the aforesaid reasons and as the procedure adopted by the respondents for recovery of loan amount from the petitioner, amounts to violation of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 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. In view of the foregoing discussion, 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 adhere to the guidelines and instructions issued by the 2nd respondent and as hold by the Hon’ble Apex Court as stated supra.
10. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.”
3. Accordingly, by following the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction: Respondents are directed to ensure that the agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts shall strictly adhere to the guidelines and instructions issued by the 2nd respondent and as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
4. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this case, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
Date:31.03.2026 SA
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.80 of 2026
Dt.31.03.2026 SA