[3331 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATT^^ WRIT PETITION NO: 10371 OF 2025 O smi Jlji > O o Between: Shaik. Guntupalli Mohammad Haneef, C/o. Hussain, D-no- 2-10, Vengalarao Nagar, Udayagiri Mandalam, GandiPalem (Village), Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh-524236 ...PETITIONER/S AND 1. Union of India, rep by its Secretary,Ministry of Finance, Department of ExpenditureRoom-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. 3. Shri Ram Finance Limited, Badvel Branch represented by its Branch Manager Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh-516227. 4. Shri Ram Finance Limited, represented by its Managing Director, Regd office. SriTowers, Plot No.14A,South Phase, Industrial Estate, Guindy,Chennai,Tamil Nadu- 600 032, India, ...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 to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 4, who are attempting to recover loan amounts from the petitioner by sending recovery agents to the petitioner's residence without adhering to the Circular issued by Respondent No. 2, vide RBI/2022-23/108 DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.04.158/2022-23 dated 12.08.2022. Such actions are illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently, direct Respondent Nos. 3 to 4 to immediately stop sending recovery agents to the petitioner's residence and to strictly adhere to the Circular issued by Respondent DOR.ORG.REC.65/21.04.158/2022-23, recovering any outstanding loans. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 No. 2 vide RBI/2022-23/108 12.08.2022. dated while 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 direct Respondent Nos.3 to 4 not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner, including sending recovery agents to the petitioner's residence for loan recovery . Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents 3 and 4: SRI. O UDAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2 : SRI VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010171012025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI # WRIT PETITION NO: 10371/2025 Between: Shaik. Guntupalli Mohammad Haneef, ...PETITIONER AND Union Of India and Others RESPONDFNT(.S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.0 UDAYA KUMAR 2.VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri Karthik Sha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri V. Hemanth Kumar, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri O. Uday Kumar, learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 3 and 4 in sending private recovery agents to the petitioner’s house, despite the circular issued by respondent No.2 vide RBI/2022-23/108 DOR.ORG. REO?65/21.04.158/2022-23 dated 12.08.2022, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. \ Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner availed a loan from the financier, respondent No.4 and paid certain EMIs. Due to the financial crisis, the petitioner committed default in payment of EMIs from November 2024. The recovery agents of respondents 3 and 4 are coming to the petitioners shop and resorting to highhanded methods. Hence, the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 would submit that the petitioner committed default in payment of EMIs, and respondents 3 and 4 initiated necessary proceedings, as per the law. 5. An interim order was granted on 24.04.2025 directing respondents 3 and 4 to adhere to the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India vide RBI/2022-23/108 DOR.ORG. REC.65/21.04.158/2022-23 dated 12.08.2022. 6. The Reserve Bank of India issued guidelines, dated 12.08.2022, concerning the outsourcing of financial services-resnonsibilitie s of regulated entities employing Recovery Agents. 7. "The practice of hiring recovery agents is deprecated. The Hon’ble Apex Court in ICICI Bank Limited v. Prakash Kaur and others\ dealt with the issue concerning the practice adopted by the banks / financial institutions, in hiring recovery agents, who are musclemen, for recovery of loans and securing possession of the vehicles, in cases where the borrower commits default and observed as under at para No. 16: “16. Before we part with this matter, we wish to make it clear that do not appreciate the procedure adopted by the Bank in removing the vehicle from the possession of the writ petitioner. The practice of hiring recovery agents, who are musclemen, is deprecated and needs to be discouraged. The Bank should resort to procedure recognized by law to take possession of vehicles in cases where the borrower may have committed default in payment of the installments instead of taking resort to strong-arm tactics.” % we ‘ (2007) 2 see 711 8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in ICICI Bank vs. Shanti Devi Sharma and others^ considered the guidelines issued by RBI and observed para 17; as under at 14. We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we are living in a civil country and are governed by the Rule of Law.” 9. Given the above facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is counsel on either side, directing respondents 3 and 4 to adhere to the guidelines and instructions issued by the RBI concerning the recovery of the loan amount from the petitioner. No costs. disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of learned As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-K. SWNIVASA RAJU assistant regi^ar //TRUE COPY// OFFICER SE' To, 1. The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of ExpenditureRoom-No74-B, New Delhi - 110001 (India). Director, Reserve Bank of India, 2nd floor. Central Office Building, Bharat Singh Marg, Mumbai. 3. The Branch Manager, Shri Ram Finance Limited, Badvel Branch Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh-516227. 4. The Managing Director, Shri Ram Finance Limited,Regd office. SriTowers, Plot No. 14A,South Phase, Industrial Estate Guindy,Chennai,Tamil Nadu- 600 032, India, 5. One CC to SRI. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Advocate [OPUCl 6. One CC to SRI. VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL) Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRI. O UDAY KUMAR Advocate [OPUCl 8. Three CD Copies psk ' (2008) 7 see 532 HIGH COURT \ DATED:08/05/2025 ORDER WP.No. 10371 of 2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITH NO COSTS