Writ restraint in RBI supervisory action: Bombay HC upheld supersession of an NBFC board on inspection-based regulatory concerns.

Section 45-IE of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 empowers RBI to supersede the board of a non-banking financial company where necessary in the public interest, to protect depositors or creditors, secure proper management, or maintain financial stability. On inspection findings under Section 45N showing financial deterioration, repayment defaults, regulatory non-compliance, governance deficiencies and evergreening concerns, the Bombay HC held that such supervisory action falls within expert regulatory judgment. The writ court will not interfere under Article 226 unless the action is shown to be without jurisdiction, arbitrary, or in breach of natural justice. The challenge to the supersession order therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court should interfere under Article 226 with the Reserve Bank of India's order superseding the Board of Directors of a non-banking financial company and appointing an administrator under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934.

Analysis: The impugned action was founded on statutory inspection under Section 45N of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, which disclosed serious deterioration in the company's financial position, defaults in repayment obligations, non-compliance with regulatory requirements, and supervisory concerns including governance deficiencies and evergreening. Section 45-IE of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 empowers the Reserve Bank of India to supersede the Board where such action is necessary in the public interest, to protect depositors or creditors, secure proper management, or maintain financial stability. The Court held that these were matters of financial, economic, and corporate decision-making entrusted to an expert regulator, and that no case was made out that the action was without jurisdiction, arbitrary, or in breach of natural justice.

Conclusion: Interference was not warranted and the challenge to the supersession order failed.

Ratio Decidendi: In matters of financial regulation taken by an expert statutory authority on the basis of inspection findings and supervisory concerns, the writ court will exercise restraint and will not interfere under Article 226 unless the action is shown to be without jurisdiction, arbitrary, or violative of natural justice.

---