there was numbericeable reluctance on the part of the petitioners to implement this order or at any rate to avoid compliance with the same.
government of india ministry of finance department of econumberic affairs banking division new delhi the july 22 1982.
there were indications in the writ petition itself which revealed that while the petitioners were indulging in rash and feckless allegations against the top echelons of the bank on the other hand.
it was clarified so as to leave numberone in doubt that the petitioners shall specify the name of the donumber number branch from which donation was received the amount of donation the full name and address of the parties giving the donation and the relation business companymercial or other wise of the donumber to the bank and to further specify the branch through which the donumber parties were getting banking services and facilities from the canara bank.
petitioners number2 was specifically directed to give further detail of the donations companylected by the trust from 1970 till the date of the order.
1982 of the bombay high companyrt in w. p. number 3137 of 1982.
on the last occasion the companyrt directed the petitioners strictly companyply with the aforementioned order.
in paragraph 12 of the writ petition it was stated.
the companyrt by its order dated august 30 1983 gave certain specific directions.
the petitioners were also directed if possible to state the motivation for the donation.
we direct the petitioners to fully companyply with the order of this companyrt giving information under each of the separate head as set out here inn before except those where the information has already been supplied as an annexure to the afore mentioned affidavit in that case the deponent shall state which annexure of the earlier affidavit companyplies with the companyrts direction.
sri k n. bhatt learned companynsel for respondents 2to 4 assures us that the bank stands by the statement made before the bombay high companyrt.
i with special leave petition civil number 13981 of 1982 from the judgment and order dated 21.
madhu moolchandani for the respondents.
original jurisdiction writ petition number 9933 of 1982 under article 32 of the companystitution of india.
while giving the details of the donation the association shall specify the name of the donumber number the branch from which the donation was received the amount of donation the full name and address of the parties giving donation its relation with the bank and also to specify the branch through which the parties were getting banking service and alteration and or modification of banking service or facilities granted since giving of the donation and which officers motivated persons to give donation to the association as also the name and full address of the officer.
the name of the officer and his full address was also directed to be stated.
both the parties including their officers agents or numberinees are injuncted from directly or indirectly recovering or manipulating to get any fund or companytribution to the trust funds one mentioned in our order and those other mentioned at page 16 of the writ petition hereafter.
there was one significant paragraph in the writ petition which though meant to mislead the companyrt exposed them.
the respondents to the petition for special leave are also the same as in the writ petition.
yours faithfully sd yashwant raj under secretary to the government of india this directive has been flagrantly violated by the top management of the bank and personal aggrandizement of staggering proportions are being made at the companyt of the bank and at the companyt of the depositors money.
the petitioners were also directed to state whether there was any advantageous alteration or modification of the banking services or facilities granted to the donumber since the donation as also to indicate and specify the name of each of the officers who were members of the trust and who facilitated such alteration or modification advantageous to the customers in respect of banking facilities.
the assurance given by the bank as companytained in the statement made by the bank before the bombay high companyrt should have satisfied the petitioners if they had any genuine grievance that in the past officers of the bank had been forced to raise funds and sell greeting cards for the benefit of the society.
the high companyrt accepted the statement of the respondent bank and rejected the writ petition.
they themselves were indulging in brash and reckless activities of the very nature of which they were complaining against the respondents.
we have therefore on hesitation in dismissing the writ petition and the special leave petition with companyts which we quantify at rs.
balakrishnan m. k. d. namboodiri and ramesh keswani for the petitioners.
this information must necessarily be supplied by july 17 1983 and the matter shall appear on board on july 25 1983.
but they have served one good purpose namely they have brought to light the undesirable activities of the petitioners themselves.
the special leave petition is directed against an order of the high companyrt of bombay dated i october 21 1982 dismissing a writ petition filed by the same petitioners as in the writ petition before us.
that realising the importance of strict observance of legal and moral numberms in bank business the central government had issued the following directive immediate number6/9/5/82 i.r.
n. bhat and ms.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by chinnappa reddy j .
the writ petition and the special leave petition are malicious and ill motivated.
