Kushal Mangal v. The Union Of India Through The Principal Secretary
Trupti 40-wp-5099-2022.doc TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date: 2023.03.17 17:23:31 +0530 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5099 OF 2022 Kushal Mangal ...
Petitioner versus The Union of India & Ors.
...
Respondents ......
Mr. Ashok Saraogi for the Petitioner.
Mr. D.P.Singh with Mr. Rui Rodrigues for Respondent No.1. Mr. Halil A. Khan i/b. Mr. Ajinkya Kudalkar for Respondent No.2. Mr. Raghav Taneja i/b. Vidhi Partners for Respondent No.4. Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b. V. Deshpande & Co. for Respondent No.5. ......
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.
DATE : 13 MARCH 2023 P.C. :- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2.
By this petition, the Petitioner is seeking the following reliefs : "a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order and direction directing the appointment of some fit and proper person as a Commission and/or a Special Task Force by way of experts to examine the accounts of the Respondents No.2 and more particularly, transfer of Debts of different borrowers in favour of the Respondents No. 4 and allied companies and submit necessary Report before this Hon'ble Court.
Trupti 40-wp-5099-2022.doc b) That subject to such enquiry being made and subject to report being received, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct all concerned involved in such scam to be dealt with in accordance with law". 3.
The Petitioner seeks to espouse the cause of a company known Anshul Steels Limited. The Petitioner is stated to be the Ex-Director of that company. Anshul Steels Limited is not a party Respondent in this petition, which fact is recorded in our order dated 7 February 2023. Grievances that the Petitioner seeks to raise are in respect of Anshul Steels Limited and how Anshul Steels Limited is being prejudiced by the alleged activities of the Respondents. The Petitioner is no longer the Director of the said company and therefore, at the behest of the Petitioner, we are not inclined to examine the wider issue raised such as appointment of a Commissioner to examine the affairs of the State Bank of India. 4.
As and when the cause is raised by those who are affected, question will arise whether any enquiry is necessary. 5.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. ABHAY AHUJA, J.
NITIN JAMDAR, J.