Telangana High Court
WP/508/2026 of Syed Jamaluddin Vs Union of India on 8 January 2026
Between: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE:SR JUST]CE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT N NO: 508 oF 2026 AND Sved Jamaluddin, C/o Syed Kaleemuddin, Age. 33 years,
[ 3300 I
Between:
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE:SR JUST]CE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT
N NO: 508 oF 2026
AND
Sved Jamaluddin, C/o Syed Kaleemuddin, Age. 33 years, Occ. Pvt Employee'
R/o 3-9-192/ 11N2, W;ddeta Colony, Medak Mandal, Medak, Telangana - 502110' Pan No' EFPPS0201K
...pETraoNER
1 . Union of lndia, Represent by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi
2. Reserve Bankof l;rdia (RBl), Represent by its Chief General Manager, 6-1- 65, Secretariat Road, Saifabad, Hyderabad 1500004.
3. Koiak Mahindra Prime Limited, Rdp by its Principal Nodal officer, Kotak lnfiniti, 4th floor, Zone 1, Bldg No. 21, infinity Park, General AK Vaidya Marg, Malad (E), Mumbai - 400097.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent No. 3 in attempting to recover amounts from the petitioner in an arbitrary, illegal, and high- handed manner without following the due process of law and in blatant violation of the Reserve Bank of lndia Circular dated 12.08.2022 bearing No. RBI/2022- 23l1OB, DOR.ORG.REC.65121.O4.15Bl2O22-23, and further declaring the inaction of respondent No. 2 in enforcing the said Circular as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the respondent authorities to refrain from undertaking. any coercive or unlawful recovery measures against the petitioner and to strictly comply with the due process of law and the aforesaid circular in all recovery proceedings, and further restrain .respondent No. 3, their agents, recovery agents, executives, managers, or any person acting on their behalf from engaging in any acts of intimidation, harassment, humiliation, or intrusion into the privacy of the petitioner or his family members, referaes or friends, including persistent or anonymous calls, threatening messages, or physical visits to the petitioners premises, and further direct respondent No. 2 to enforce the said RBI Circular in letter and spirit and to initiate appropriate and stringent action against the errant officials of respondent No. 3 for violating legal norms, and pending disposal of the writ petition, direct the respondent No. 3 not to resort to any coercive measures against the petitioner except through lawful means and in strict adherence to the Circular dated
12.O8.2022.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia nt Nos.2 & 3: - The Court made the following: ORDER
Counsel for the ResPonde
t
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A
WRIT PETITION No.5O8 of 2o26
08.o L.2026
Between:
Syed Jamaluddin
..Petitioner
AND
The Union of India,
Represented by its Secret.ry,
Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi & two others
...Respondents
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 Sri Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Central Government appearing for respondent No.1.
2. Despite service of notice, none appeared for remaining respondents. l.
3. 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 orcler may be passed in this writ petition as well. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: \ II ; i I
4. "8. In view of the above circulars, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to ensure that the agents ""i"Sla by them for recovery of the loan amounts, shall strictly fofori the guidelines and instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of Incia 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). g. with the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs." Learned Standing counsel for respondent No.1 has no objection
5. Accordingly, in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18913 o: 2024, dated 22.08.2024, and for the reasons alike, this Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities and their agents to scrupulously 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- Prakash Kaur'ls case aad ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma'2s case, while recovering the loan amounts from the petitioner. No costs. Pending miscellaneous aPPlications, il elv_, shl-!/sta1d closed. I
To 7 SCC ti32 SD/. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER The Secre'tdry, Union of lndia, IVinistry of F Delhi : l), 6-1 -65, Secretariat The Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of I (RB Road, Saiabad, Hyderabad - 500004. The Principal Nodal officer, Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited, Kotak lnfiniti, 4th floor, Zone;1, Bldg No. 21, lnfinity Park, General AK Vaidya Marg, Malad (E), Mumbai - 400097. One CC to SRI BONTHU LOKESH PHANINDRA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia [OPUC] Two CD Copies
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. PSK. *ry
f. fr HIGH COIJRT DATED:013/01 12026
ORDER
WP.No.508 of 2026 t THE S c 0 2 [i:g ?a)fr (' ,c () * *f .; '1".''1""' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS odt\a l i I