(1.) The claimants are before this Court challenging the order dtd. 13/7/2021 passed below Exh.9 in MACMA no.57 of 2020, where the prayer came to be rejected, wherein it was urged that the compensation amount be put in fixed deposit in Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank.
(2.) Mr. Bhalodi, learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicants are holding a savings account in Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank and therefore, they had made a prayer to pass necessary order of putting the amount in the fixed deposit at the Bank, where the claimants hold their savings account. Mr. Bhalodi submits that the learned Tribunal, while passing the judgment and award, had made a direction to place the amount in a nationalized Bank. Mr. Bhalodi states that the applicants - claimants are from the tribal area and they would have their savings account in the Banks which would be convenient for their banking transaction as well as from the place of residence.
(3.) Mr. Bhalodi further stated that Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank is at par with the nationalized Bank and there is nothing on record or in public domain to suggest that there would be any risk of putting the amount in the said Bank and a communication was addressed by the Regional Manager of Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank on 24/9/2019 to the learned Principal District Judge with the subject of classification of Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank. In the said letter, it is stated that all the Regional Rural Banks are listed in the 2nd schedule and are classified as "Scheduled Banks" under Sec. 42 and 2(e) of RBI Act, 1934 as they were established under the Regional Rural Bank Act , 1976. Mr. Bhalodi, thus, stated that as per the communication, Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank is owned by Government of India, Government of Gujarat and Bank of Baroda in the ratio of 50:15:35 and 65% of Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank is directly owned by Central and State Government and thus, stated that the rejection of the application would be an infringement of the personal right of the applicants and is inconsistent with the general practice of the Court. The learned Tribunal had passed the order of depositing the money in the nationalized Bank as per the application in many of the MACP matters, the amount was deposited in Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank and by mere observation of non-compliance, without any evidence on record, the learned Tribunal, on its own, has made certain observations against the Bank while the communication of the Bank to the learned Principal District Judge shows the holding of the Government of Gujarat as well as Central Government and Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank. Further, the communication from the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Department of Financial Services, New Delhi dtd. 8/5/2014 shows that the Regional Rural Banks established under the provisions of the RRBs Act, 1976 is with the objective of an alternatvie channel to cooperative credit structure which has played a crucial role in meeting the credit needs of the rural areas and implementation of Financial Inclusion Scheme of the Government of India. The applicants from rural area would certainly prefer their money to be invested in the Banks which is owned with the object of developing the cooperative credit structure and therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have granted the application. The observation so made with regard to the Bank could not be conducive even to the Bank concerned since nothing has been brought on record by way of report of any of the Government authority of any non-compliance of the rules and regulations. Thus, for the reasons noted hereinabove, the order dtd. 13/7/2021 passed below Exh.9 in MACMA no.57 of 2020 is quashed and set aside. Let the amount be placed in Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank, where the claimants hold their savings account.