Telangana High Court
WP/14299/2026 of Sri. M. Srinivas Rao Vs The Union of India on 4 May 2026
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO:1 4299 0F 2026 Between: Sri. M. Srinivas Rao, S/o. M. Rama Rao, Aged about 55 Years'
13300 I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO:1 4299 0F 2026
Between:
Sri. M. Srinivas Rao, S/o. M. Rama Rao, Aged about 55 Years' Occ' Land Mark Constructions Managing partner, F/o.H no B-3-678l42lcl5' Navodaya Colony, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Union of lndia, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance' New Delhi.
2.TheReserveBankoflndia,representedbyitsChiefGeneralManager'6
Sansad Marg, New Delhi -1 '10001
3. M/s State Bank Of lndia, Rep by its Asst General Manager' RlAig:P'C
Branch, No.3-6-263, Sterling Building' Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad-500 029'
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstancesStatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybepleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos. 3 in aftempting to recover the amount from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal and high-handed manner without following the due process of law and in violation of the Reserve Bank of lndia circular d aled 12- o8-2o22No'RBl/2022-23(DoR.oRG.REc.65-21.04.15812022-23),andtofurther declare the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said circular as violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Cgnstitution of lndia, and to consequently direct the -@*T
respondent authorities to refrain from undertaking any coercive or unlawful re@very measures against me without following due process of law'
l-A. 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 to restrain respondent Nos. 3 , their agents, executive managers or any person acting on their behalf from harassment, anonymous calls, threatening messages and physical visits to my house.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. GOTATI RAi'l BABU
CLr"."f for the Respondent No.1:SRl N' BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Counsel for the Respondent: SRI A.L' BHARADWAJINI
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
i
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BTIEEMAPAI{A
WRIT PETITION No. 14299 of 2026
Dated: 04.05.2026
Between:
M.Srinivasa Rao
The Union of India,
Represented bY its Secretar5r
Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi & others.
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:
AND Petitioner ...Respondents Heard Mr.G.Ram Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and 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 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 respondenls to ensure thai t[re agents engaged by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictiy lbllow the guidetines and instructions issued by the Rescive Bank of India and also the judgments of the Hon'bie 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 Standing counsel for the respondents has no obj ection.
4. Accordingly, rn terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.189i3 of 2024, dated 22.Oa.2024, and for the reasons alike, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities and their agents to scrupuiously follow the guidelines/ instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India in its Circuiar dated 12 Oa.2O22 and a-lso the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Prakash Kaurr case and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma2 case, while recovering the loan amounts from the petitioner. No costs Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand clo sed 1' '(zootl2 scc 711 21zooe1 7 scc s32 To, SD/.M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER '1 . The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Union of lndia, New Delhi.
2. The Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of lndia' 6 Sansad Marg, New Delhi -110001
3. The Asst. General Manager, M/s State Bank Of lndia, R.A.C.P 0 Branch, No.3-6-263, Sterling Building, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad-sOO 029.
4. One CC to SRl. GOTATI RAM BABU, Advocate IOPUC] 5, One CC to SRl. A L BHARADWAJINI, Advocate [OPUC] -#
Y I
6. One CC to SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor General of lndia loPUcl
7. Two CD Copies DAN 1zy- BS s
HIGH COURT DATED: 0410512026
ORDER
WP.No.14299 of 2026 t lttE s T4 20 ilAY il6 ottoorcH o {J 6'(' zo A t { * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS c.h (' Y"€- ^P