(1.) The writ petition has been filed challenging the Cautionary list issued by the second respondent M/s Bank of Maharashtra vide letter Ref.No.AX1/Cr.Mon/Third Party Entity/2015/16, letter dated 21.11.2015 and consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of valuers.
(2.) According to the petitioner, he was initially appointed as panel Valuer for a period of three years. Normally, he was entitled for extension for further period. In the meanwhile, by communication dated 21.11.2015 addressed to Indian Bank's Association, Mumbai he was put on cautionary list, as if he has done valuation without seeing the documents properly. According to him, this affects his Fundamental Right. In fact, by virtue of this, he would loose to be a panel valuer in any other bank and he is likely to be delisted. According to him, even this order was not addressed to him. He obtained the details through Right to Information Act and based on the same he has come forward with the present writ petition challenging the communication issued by the Bank of Maharashtra to the Indian Bank's Association.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no notice was issued before cancellation of his original appointment. In this connection, he relied on a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court for the proposition that before blacklisting there should be notice.