District Consumer Commission, Bokaro.

Case No. 147/2017

 Date of Filing-31-10-2017

 Date of Order-16-07-2022

Swami Sahjanand Saraswati B.Ed. College, Sector-8/B, Bokaro through its President, Shri Prabhu Narayan Roy, Residence of Plot No. 159, Co-operative Colony, Bokaro Steel City District- Bokaro                              

Vr.

1. Mahesh Kumar Jain, Managing Director & CEO, IDBI Bank Ltd. IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai Maharashtra

 2. Shekhar Runda, Branch Manager, IDBI Bank Ltd., A-1/2, City Centre, Sector-4, Bokaro

Present:-

          Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

           Shri Bhawani Prasad Lal Das, Member

          Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

                                                -Order-

1. This case has been filed by the complainant with prayer to direct O.P. No.1 & 2 to remove debit freeze and to allow transactions in the account of the complainant college or to produce order of the competent authority. Further prayer is to award compensation Rs. 20,00,000/- and litigation cost Rs. 50,000/- respectively  against O.P. No. 1 & 2 and to order for payment of interest accrued on the amount already available in the account of the complainant.
2. Complainant’s case in brief is that Swami Sahjanand Saraswati B.Ed. College, Bokaro is maintaining S.B. Account No. 0185104000107280  in the IDBI Bank Ltd. A-1/2, City Centre, Sector-4, Bokaro 827004 Jharkhand but on 19.06.2017 without any order of any statutory competent authority O.P. No.2 freezed above account and on enquiry it was informed by the Bank that as per letter received from Dr. T.P. Singh, Secretary B.Ed. College account has been freezed due to dispute related to election of the committee. On 28.06.2017 another letter was issued by O.P. No.2 mentioning that on the advice of an advocate such order has been passed. In this way the action of the bank is not in accordance with law rather it is arbitrary and against the Banking norms. Prior intimation regarding freezing of the account was also not given to the College hence it compelled to file this case with above mentioned prayer.
3.  O.P. No.1 & 2 appeared and they have filed joint W.S. mentioning therein that complainant is not competent to institute the case and O.P. No. 1 is not the essential party of the case. Further reply is that O.P. No.2 has acted in his official capacity but he has been personally made party in this case and IDBI Bank is the essential party to whom complainant has not impleaded in this case. Further reply is that there is no cause of action of this case and complainant is not the consumer. Further reply is that Swami Sahjanand Saraswati Sewa Samaj  is the governing body of said college and later on it has been dissolved and  Ad-hoc body has been formed and Bank account was being operated by signature of any of two namely President, Secretary and Treasurer. It was decided by the managing committee to hold election on 18.06.2017 for re-organization of the committee which was informed to the Bank hence operation of the account has been freezed. Further reply is that after election new executive body was formed which was informed to the Inspector General of Registration, Jharkhand, Ranchi on 20.06.2017. Further reply is that on 19.06.2017 bank received two communications making contradictory demands on the bank for operating the bank account and there was allegation and counter allegation against both the parties of the committee, hence on 22.06.2017 a letter was written to Inspector General of Registration, Jharkhand, Ranchi seeking clarification about rival claims of office bearer but no response was received and inspite of repeated directions both the parties have also not provided necessary documents or Court orders for smooth running of the account. On legal opinion, account has been freezed hence bank has acted to protect the interest of account holders and rival factions are themselves responsible for freezing of account, hence case is liable to be dismissed.
4. During pendency of the case one Nand Kishore Rai has also been added as O.P. No.3 but he has not filed separate W.S. in this case.
5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties we are of the opinion that only point for consideration is that whether action of the Bank is in accordance with norms and whether complainant is entitled to get relief as claimed.
6.  Opening of above mentioned account in IDBI Bank is admitted fact of both the parties. Another admitted fact is that operation of the said account was freezed on the alleged date.
7.  In support of the facts mentioned in the complaint petition complainant has filed photo copy of letter dt. 20.06.2017 written by the IDBI Bank to the President, Swami Sahjanand B.Ed. College, Sector-8/B, B.S. City, Bokaro mentioning therein that in view of letter No. 105 dt. 16.06.2017 received from Dr. T.P. Singh who was Secretary of B.Ed. College Swami Sahjanand Sewa Samaj at the time of opening of the account, bank was advised to stop transactions temporarily because the election of committee was to be held on 18.06.2017, hence as per request order for freezing was passed. Photo copy of said letter dt. 16.06.2017 of Dr. T.P. Singh has been annexed with above mentioned letter. Annexure-2 is the photo copy of letter dt. 21.06.2017 written by some P.N. Rai demanding some explanation from the Bank on the points mentioned in the letter. Annexure-3 is photo copy of letter dt. 28.06.2017 written by the Bank to said P.N. Rai along with photo copy of the legal advice and it is mentioned in that very reply that on the legal advice account has been debit freeze.
8. During pendency of this case photo copy of the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court Jharkhand at Ranchi in W.P. (C ) No. 2178/2019 dt. 22.08.2019 has been filed. The following purpose of this case which is as follows:-

“The Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court while disposing of this aforesaid write petition, has directed the respondent No.2 to take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner dt. 13-04-2018 in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. In pursuance threto, the Deputy Commissioner,Bokaro has passed order on 26.12.2018, by which, both the parties have been restrained from operating the bank account and the same has been permitted ot be carried out under the supervision of the Additional Collector, Bokaro.

          Since the issue of jurisdiction of the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand has been raised and as such this Court after going across the submission as recorded hereinabove is of the view that the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro although has acted in pursuance to the order passed by this Court in W.P. (C ) No. 4055 of 2018 but the question herein is that under what authority the Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand has acted by looking into the legality and propriety, if any, in the decision taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro merely on account of the objection filed by the respondent No.9 to that effect.

In view thereof, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case for passing interim order on the issue of jurisdiction of the Chief Secretary and therefore, the order dt. 31.12.2018 passed by the Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand is required to be kept in abeyance.

In view thereof, the order dt. 31.12.2018 passed by the chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand is kept in abeyance till the next date.

The order dt. 27.12.2018 shall be in operation.

        Photo copy of the order dt. 26.12.2018 issued by the office of the Deputy Commission, Bokaro has also been filed, accordingly the D.C. Bokaro convened a meeting with all the parties and considering the dispute related to educational institution as well as situation related to law and order problem he has deputed Additional Collector, Bokaro as Observer related to the said institution and its bank accounts. It has also been ordered that there shall be any withdrawal of any amount from the account in supervision of A.C. Bokaro after obtaining his permission.

         Phot copy of order dt. 24.01.2022 of the office of D.C. Bokaro has also been filed by the complainant  which shows that vide order dt. 24.01.2022 the A.C. Bokaro has also passed order to regulate the operation of the bank account etc. Said order has been passed in compliance with the order dt. 22.08.2019 passed by the Hon’ble High Court in W.P. (C ) No. 2178/ 2019 and memo No. 4087 dt. 27.12.2018 of D.C. Bokaro.

9. In light of above discussion specially the subsequent developments taken place in the matter related to above mentioned order of the Hon’ble High Court as well as the order of the Deputy Commission, Bokaro and order of the A.C. Bokaro we are of the view that those orders are having binding effect on all concerned and all concerned are required to obey it in letter and spirit. Therefore, in the changed circumstance present case is infructuous which is liable to be disposed off in view of above mentioned orders. Accordingly this point is being decided against the complainant.
10. Therefore, in light of above discussion this case is being disposed off in light of the orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court and orders passed by the D.C. as well as A.C. Bokaro and in the facts and circumstance of the case parties shall bear their own costs.