Government guidelines under service regulations did not require fresh Reserve Bank consultation, and the challenge failed.

Regulation 26 of the Andhra Bank (Officers) Service Regulations, 1982 authorised Government guidelines on use of bank cars, and the Court held that this power operated in a distinct field from the regulation-making process under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980. Because the regulation had already been validly framed, the Central Government was not required to obtain a fresh consultation with the Reserve Bank of India before issuing the later guidelines. The consultation requirement in Section 8 was therefore inapplicable on these facts, and the challenge to the guidelines failed. The impugned judgment was set aside and the Bank's appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Central Government was required to consult the Reserve Bank of India before issuing guidelines under Regulation 26 of the Andhra Bank (Officers) Service Regulations, 1982, and whether the absence of such consultation invalidated the impugned guidelines.

Analysis: Regulation 26 empowered the Bank to frame rules for use of bank cars for personal purposes in accordance with Government guidelines from time to time. Section 8 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 concerns directions on matters of policy involving public interest, while Section 19 governs the framing of regulations by the Board after consultation with the Reserve Bank and with prior sanction of the Central Government. The Court held that these are distinct fields of power. The regulation had already been framed in the statutory manner, and the Government's later guidelines under Regulation 26 did not require a fresh consultative process with the Reserve Bank. The word "consultation" in Section 8 was therefore inapplicable to the issuance of such guidelines in the present setting.

Conclusion: The Central Government was not required to consult the Reserve Bank of India before issuing the guidelines, and the challenge to the guidelines on that ground failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment was unsustainable and the Bank's appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory regulation itself authorises the issuance of Government guidelines from time to time, a fresh consultation with the Reserve Bank is not required unless the governing statute specifically makes such consultation a condition precedent for that exercise of power.

---