[2025:RJ-JP:48199] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7454/2025 1. M/s. Tragents Electricals, 30-31, Kutchery Road, Ajmer through its proprietor Shri Shekhar Chand Sacheti. 2. Shekhar Chand Sacheti son of Late Shri Kushal Chand Sacheti, aged about 72 Years, proprietor of M/s Tragents Electricals, 30-31, Kutchery Road, Ajmer. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Union of India through its Secretary, Department of Finance, 6A, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi. 2. Reserve Bank of India through its General Manager, Department of Non Banking Supervision, Central Office Centre-I, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Colaba Mumbai-400005. 3. Baaz Trading Investment Limited, Corporate Office F-78, Parbatpura Industrial Area, Ajmer through its Director & Authorised Signatory Shri Naveen Maheshwari. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dilip Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Alok Garg with Ms. Swati Daga HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 27/11/2025 1. Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition for seeking quashing of registration certificate dated 26.05.1998 issued by respondent No.2 in favour of the respondent No.3 for carrying out activities in non-banking financial sector. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are facing criminal complaint lodged by respondent [2025:RJ-JP:48199] (2 of 2) [CW-7454/2025] No.3, whereas its registration itself is faulty and improper. It is also submitted that by the learned counsel for the petitioners that one commercial suit is also pending, in which also similar application questioning registration of respondent No.3 has been filed. 3. For the purpose of invoking writ jurisdiction, a person is required to establishes infringement of his legal rights and locus standi for challenging any particular order or document, however, in the instant case, the petitioner has utterly failed to point out his locus and valid grounds to challenge the certificate of registration, on the basis of facts mentioned in the petition. 4. However, the petitioner is at liberty to get such adjudication at the appropriate forum. 5. With these observations, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/38