Judgment:
The Court : By this application the petitioners seek a direction upon the respondent authorities to conduct audit and an independent enquiry into the affairs of the respondent no.6. The case of the petitioners is that the respondent no.6 has been functioning by its directors to their benefit and to the detriment of the investors.
The petitioners are small time investors in the respondent no.6 and the acts of the directors of the respondent no.6 has resulted in dissipation of the assets of the respondent no.6.
Therefore, the affairs of the respondent no.6 ought to be reorganized so that its banking operations are continued in a fair and proper manner and for such purposes an investigation be made. On rejection of the application for grant of license a writ petition has been filed and the same is pending adjudication.
The respondent no.6 is defunct although the State intends to revive the same for which purposes huge sums are to be invested. Without an investigation into the affairs of the respondent no.6 revival ought not to be permitted and for such purposes appropriate directions be given.
Counsel for the respondent no.6 submits that some of the directors resigned on 27th July 2010. W.P.no.17019(W) of 2010 has been filed by a depositor and is pending before this court. Therefore, no order be passed on this application as the courts are of concurrent jurisdiction. Counsel for the Reserve Bank of India submits that by communication dated 10th June, 2010 the application for grant of license filed by the respondent no.6 was rejected. An intimation in this regard was also given to the respondent no.6.
The accounts of the respondent no.6 has since then been frozen and the provisions of the Banking Regulations Act ought to be allowed to be followed and therefore no order be passed on this application.
Counsel for the respondent no.12 being one of the directors has sought for expunging his name from the writ petition as he had resigned in 2008 and such resignation was submitted to the Board of Directors. Counsel for the respondent no.18 submits that W.P.No.14853(W) of 2010 has been filed by the respondent no.6 and is pending adjudication.
Having considered the submissions of the parties although the relief sought in this writ petition relates to the affairs of the cooperative bank but in effect the petitioners seek continuation of the banking operations of the respondent no.6 either by merger or appointment of administrator or reorganizing the affairs of the respondent no.6 through appointment of independent and fair directors.
The said question has arisen as the application for grant of license was rejected by the Reserve Bank of India and communicated by letter dated 10th June, 2010 to the Chief Executive Officer of the Cooperative Bank. The rejection is the subject matter of W.P.No.14853(W) of 2010 which is pending adjudication and also W.P.No.17019 of 2010 which has been filed by an interested depositor.
In effect the petitioners are also seeking to set aside the communication dated 10th June, 2010 though not set out in such clear terms but the indirect effect of grant of reliefs in this writ petition will tantamount to nullifying the said rejection order. This is more evident as no representation made to the Registrar for enquiry has been annexed to the writ petition.
Therefore, no order can be passed on this application and the application is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the event the petitioners are desirous of an enquiry being made by the Registrar it will be open to them to seek redress and the dismissal of the writ petition will not in any way debar them from doing so. As no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed, the allegations contained in the petition are not admitted.
It is only on the ground of lack of jurisdiction that this writ petition has been dismissed and the petitioners will be entitled to seek redresses of their grievance before the appropriate forum.
All parties concerned are to act on a Photostat signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.