1 CGHC010193292021 2026:CGHC:41794 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3320 of 2021 1 - Lord Buddha Educational Society 229, Sector-15a, Noida, Distt. Gautam Buddha Nagar, Noida, U.P., Through Its Secretary Sh. Labh Singh, S/o Sh. Fakir Chand Singh, Aged About 49 Years, R/o E-1, Gh- 10, New Ashiyana Apartment, Sector 21-D, Faridabad, Harayana., District : Faridabad, Haryana ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Canara Bank Through Its Md And Ceo, Circle Office, Spencer Towers, No. 86, Mg Road, Banglore (Karnataka), Karnataka 2 - Senior Manager Canara Bank, Mid Corporate Branch, Pujari Chamber, Block B-1, Bhutal, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Banking Ombudsman Reserve Bank Of India, 54/949, Subhashish Parisar, Satya Prem Vihar, Mahadev Ghat Road, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : None 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25/09/2026 1. The petitioner herein has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs :- “10.1] That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions quashing impugned directing the respondent bank to correct its internal ratings and the charge the petitioner only the prevailing rate of interest. per 10.2] That, the Hon'ble Court may direct the respondent bank to refund/adjust the excess interest overcharged by Canara Bank than prevailing market interest rate. 10.3] The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent bank to refund various fees charged in addition to interest in the name of review charges. 10.4] The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent bank to correct petitioner's rating so that they can take loan from any other bank and get out of clutches of respondent bank. 10.5] That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the banking ombudsman to take appropriate action on the complaint moved by the petitioner on 20.05.2021 and 09.06.2021, respectively. 10.6] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage, petitioner has confined his relief to para 10.5 only by which it has been sought that the banking ombudsman may be directed to consider and take appropriate action on the complaint moved by the petitioner on 20/05/2021 and 09/06/2021, respectively. 3 3. None appears for the respondents though they have been served. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. From a careful perusal of the relief sought by the petitioner, it appears that petitioner is, in fact, seeking consideration of his complaints dated 20/05/2021 and 09/06/2021, which according to the petitioner have not been adjudicated upon and the status of the said complaints shows that they have been closed. 6. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the banking ombudsman of the Reserve Bank of India are directed to consider and decide petitioner’s complaint on merits and pass a reasoned and speaking order, absolutely in accordance with law as per Clause 12 of the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006. Petitioner is at liberty to file his complaint before respondent No. 3 afresh within 30 days and in turn, the concerned authority/respondent No. 3 is directed to consider the same and decide within further period of 60 days. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction issued in favour of the respondents. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Harneet