M/S Gats Consulting (India) Pvt Ltd v. Union Of India And ORS

CWP No. 18314 of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18314 of 2013 Date of decision : 18.07.2017 M/s Gats Consulting (India) Pvt. Ltd.

....Petitioner V/s UOI & ors.

....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.K. Kaushal, Advocate for respondent no. 1. RAJAN GUPTA J.

Petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing letter dated 09.05.2012 whereby petitioner was delisted from the panel of approved valuers of South Indian Bank. Order has been challenged primarily on the ground that procedure as envisaged by clause 3.4 of the policy was not followed by the bank before removing it from the panel. Learned appearing for the Bank, however, submits that due procedure was followed. Petitioner, thereafter, moved application before the Reserve Bank of India which was rejected vide order dated 23.03.2013 (Annexure P-8). I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of case.

It appears petitioner-Firm is a consultancy Firm. Its proprietor was one of the approved valuers for a private bank namely South Indian Bank with the head office in Thirssur (Kerala). The bank revised its panel in which some of the valuers were replaced. In their reply, bank has taken a stand that there were some complaints of commission of irregularities Ajay Kumar 2017.08.01 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP No. 18314 of 2013 against the petitioner-Firm. Bank, as an institution is trustee of public money, thus, valuers integrity has to be beyond doubt. The bank came to know that petitioner-Firm has been depaneled by the State Bank of India as well. Similar action was taken by some other banks also. In view of stand of the bank, I find no ground to interfere in writ jurisdiction. Besides, on a query being put to counsel for the petitioner about the legal right, if any, vested in the petitioner-Firm to continue as consultant/valuers for the South Indian Bank, no clear answer is forthcoming. Petition is, thus without any merit and is hereby dismissed.

July 18, 2017 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ajay Kumar 2017.08.01 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document