The Supreme Court has dismissed the main petitions of SBI and HDFC Bank, rejecting the miscellaneous applications of the banks.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to withdraw the decision relating to the imposition of the Right to Information of 2015, shocking banks. In that decision, it was said that the Reserve Bank will have to give information about the banks and financial institutions which are under its regulation under the Right to Information Act.
Several banks and financial institutions (FIs), including Canara Bank, Bank of Baroda, UCO Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank, had applied to the court, requesting the withdrawal of the 2015 verdict in the Jayantilal N Mistry case. He said that the decision has far-reaching effects and they will be directly affected by it. Banks had argued that instead of reviewing the verdict, their petitions to withdraw it were hearable as they were neither party to the case nor their sayings were heard. In such a situation, the order given at that time is against the principle of natural justice.
The court said, the bank’s petitions are not worth hearing
A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Justice Vineet Saran said, “After considering the applications for withdrawal of the judgment, it is clear that the applicants have requested a review of the decision in the Jayantilal N Mistry case.” Therefore, we think that these petitions are not worth hearing. ”
Justice Rao, who wrote the order, said that the dispute is related to giving information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act by RBI. Although the information is related to the banks, the decision was from the RBI, which was challenged and the court ruled in that regard. According to the bench, during the hearing of the case, no applicant (bank) made any effort to hear himself through various applications.
The court, while rejecting the petitions, however, made it clear that it was not listening to any request from banks to improve the judgment in the Jayantilal N Mistry case. “Rejecting these applications does not mean that they have exhausted their legal option.” They can move on to the other options available in the law. ”
Know the whole matter
The Supreme Court, in a 2015 order, refused to accept the RBI’s plea that the information sought under the RTI Act could not be given as it had a trusting relationship with banks and was legal to protect its interests. And is morally bound. The court believed that the RBI should act under the RTI Act and should not hide the information. He is obliged to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act and release the information sought.
Later, many banks in the main petition of State Bank of India (SBI) and HDFC Bank had requested to withdraw the decision by miscellaneous applications. The Supreme Court set aside the main petitions of SBI and HDFC Bank and rejected the miscellaneous applications of the banks.
