The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that writ petition against a private bank under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable.
Arif Khan filed a writ seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Bank to provide the complete statement of Customer ID No. 11830806 to the petitioner with the due amount and further direct the respondents to receive the due amount in easy Installments.
Counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust and others Vs. V.R. Rudani and others : (1989) 2 SCC 691 and Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Prakash Kaur & others, decided on 26.02.2007 (Appeal (Crl.) No. 267 of 2007), has submitted that the writ against the private bank is maintainable.
A Division Bench of Hon’ble Justice Alok Singh and Hon’ble Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar noted that the Supreme Court in Federal Bank Ltd. Vs. Sagar Thomas & Ors, (2003) 10 SCC 733, considered the scope of issuance of writ under Article 226 of the Constitution against a private Bank. In this case the Supreme Court held that writ petition against the bank is not maintainable if the same is not for enforcement of statutory duty.
Further the court observed that it is not the case of the petitioner that the Mahindra Finance is an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, nor it is alleged that there is any violation of any statutory provisions in the present case.
In view of the above, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow dismissed the writ petition, with the liberty to take appropriate action as per law.
Title: Arif Khan vs Manager Mahindra Finance Sultanpur & Another
Case No.:MISC. BENCH No. – 21265 of 2020
Date of Judgment: 12.01.2021