{"id":258664,"date":"2004-04-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-04-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004"},"modified":"2018-03-13T17:43:12","modified_gmt":"2018-03-13T12:13:12","slug":"reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","title":{"rendered":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Kapadia<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Cji, S.B. Sinha, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  7803 of 2002\n\nPETITIONER:\nReserve Bank of India &amp; Another\t\n\nRESPONDENT:\nC. L. Toora &amp; Others\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/04\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nCJI,S.B. SINHA &amp; S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>KAPADIA, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThis appeal by special leave is filed by the Reserve Bank<br \/>\nof India against the judgment and order of the High Court of<br \/>\nRajasthan, Bench at Jaipur dated 12.12.2001 directing the<br \/>\nappellant to consider respondent no.1 for promotion to grade-D<br \/>\nignoring the fact that a high power Selection Board presided by<br \/>\na retired Judge of the Bombay High Court had found the<br \/>\nrespondent unsuitable for selection to the said grade.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\tThe facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">On 1.10.1988, the Currency Officer of the appellant<br \/>\nasked respondent no.1 who was Assistant Currency Officer in<br \/>\nGrade-C to look after, on 3.10.1988, the duties of M.S. Janagal,<br \/>\nAssistant Currency Officer (Grade-B), who had proceeded<br \/>\nsuddenly on casual leave.  It is the case of the appellant that<br \/>\nrespondent no.1 herein refused to comply with the orders of the<br \/>\ncurrency officer stating that he cannot be asked to discharge the<br \/>\nfunctions of Grade-B officer.  Accordingly, the said respondent<br \/>\nwas charge-sheeted on 1.12.1989 for insubordination under<br \/>\nregulation 32 of the Reserve Bank of India (Staff) Regulations,<br \/>\n1948 (hereinafter referred to as &#8220;the said regulations&#8221;).  In the<br \/>\npreliminary enquiry preceding the charge-sheet, the said<br \/>\nrespondent in reply to show-cause notice stated that on<br \/>\n1.10.1988, seven Grade-B officers were present on duty and<br \/>\nonly one of them Mr. M.S. Janagal had applied for casual leave;<br \/>\nthat he had never operated the vault in the past; that vault duties<br \/>\nwere entrusted to Grade-B officers and as such, except in<br \/>\nemergency, a Grade-C officer was entrusted with such duties<br \/>\nand, therefore, he did not intend insubordination.  In fact, he<br \/>\npointed out that on 3.10.1988, he did all the work of Claims<br \/>\nDepartment except opening and closing of vault.  By his reply<br \/>\nto show-cause notice, he further pointed out that he was under<br \/>\nmental agony on that day in the background enumerated in para<br \/>\n2 of his reply to the show-cause notice.  The appellant however<br \/>\ndid not accept the explanation of the respondent.  In the<br \/>\nmeantime, the appellant undertook selection process in the<br \/>\nmatter of promotions of officers from Grade-C to Grade-D.<br \/>\nRespondent no.1 herein was one of the candidates.  The<br \/>\nappellant constituted a high power Selection Board presided by<br \/>\nMr. Justice A.S. Ginwala, a retired judge of Bombay High<br \/>\nCourt.  The Selection Board held several meetings at Calcutta,<br \/>\nNew Delhi, Bombay and Bangalore, as promotions were to be<br \/>\nmade at all India level.  The Selection Board recommended<br \/>\ncandidates for promotion in terms of the executive policy<br \/>\nformulated by the Management in 1983 and which was in<br \/>\nexistence in 1989.  Under the said policy, a candidate had to<br \/>\nsecure in all 170 marks out of 300 for empanelment for<br \/>\npromotion to Grade-D.  Respondent no.1 herein secured 162<br \/>\nmarks and consequently he failed to qualify.  At this stage, it<br \/>\nmay be mentioned that the said respondent was interviewed at<br \/>\nNew Delhi center on 2.6.1989, wherein he was successful but<br \/>\nover all he did not secure 170 marks, hence not found suitable<br \/>\nfor the panel year 1989.  On 23.10.1990, he filed writ petition<br \/>\nNo.5483 of 1990 challenging the charge-sheet and his non-<br \/>\nselection.  During the pendency of the writ petition, disciplinary<br \/>\nenquiry was completed and the competent authority imposed<br \/>\nthe minor penalty of lowering his substantive pay by one stage<br \/>\npermanently, against which he filed departmental appeal, which<br \/>\nwas also rejected on 4.8.1994.  Respondent no.1 filed an<br \/>\namendment application to the writ petition challenging the<br \/>\nenquiry proceedings as well as the order of punishment.  By<br \/>\nimpugned judgment, the writ petition was allowed on the<br \/>\nground that the charge of insubordination was not proved.  The<br \/>\nHigh Court also found fault with the non-selection of<br \/>\nrespondent no.1 on the ground that the procedure and the<br \/>\ncriteria adopted by the Selection Board was improper.  It<br \/>\ndoubted the decision of the Selection Board in awarding only<br \/>\n162 marks on the ground that the said respondent had obtained<br \/>\nthe requisite 32 marks in the interview but he was given only<br \/>\n130 marks on performance appraisal.  In the circumstances, the<br \/>\nentire selection was set aside and the appellants were directed to<br \/>\nreframe selection and consider the said respondent for<br \/>\npromotion to scale-D from 1989.  Aggrieved, the Reserve Bank<br \/>\nof India has come to this Court by way of this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\tTwo issues arise for determination, firstly, whether the<br \/>\nappellant was justified in imposing the above penalty of<br \/>\nlowering the substantive pay of the respondent by one stage<br \/>\npermanently; and secondly, whether the High Court was right<br \/>\nin setting aside the entire selection and directing the appellant to<br \/>\npromote respondent no.1 to scale-D w.e.f. 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\tOn the first point, we are of the view that the High Court<br \/>\nwas right in coming to the conclusion that the conduct of<br \/>\nrespondent no.1 was not such as to warrant disciplinary action.<br \/>\nAs stated above, in the preliminary enquiry, respondent no.1<br \/>\nhas given his explanation vide letter dated 12.6.1989.  We have<br \/>\ngone through the letter, as discussed above.  Regulation 32<br \/>\nstates that every employee shall obey directions given to him<br \/>\nfrom time to time by his superiors.  In the present case, we do<br \/>\nnot find any insubordination or disobedience as alleged.  He has<br \/>\nstated in his reply that he has no experience of opening and<br \/>\nclosing the vault and that he did all the work of Claims<br \/>\nDepartment on 3.10.1988, except opening and closing of vault.<br \/>\nIn the circumstances, we are in agreement with the view taken<br \/>\nby the High Court in the matter of disciplinary proceedings that<br \/>\nthere was no foundation for alleged misconduct.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\tThe second issue is whether the High Court was right in<br \/>\nsetting aside the entire selection with the direction to the<br \/>\nappellant to consider the said respondent for promotion to<br \/>\nscale-D from 1989.  Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned senior<br \/>\ncounsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that<br \/>\nrespondent No. 1 was  interviewed along with other candidates<br \/>\nby the Selection Board.  On 29.5.1990, respondent no.1 was<br \/>\nadvised about his non-selection and thereafter he had appeared<br \/>\nin interview four times i.e. on 8.6.1990, 3.9.1991, 6.4.1992 and<br \/>\n5.2.1993 but was found unsuitable.  It was submitted that the<br \/>\nSelection Board was presided by a retired Judge of the High<br \/>\nCourt of unquestionable impartiality who had no axe to grind.<br \/>\nHe contended that it was open to the Selection Board to<br \/>\nformulate its own procedure in the matter of allotment of marks<br \/>\nfor interview, written test and performance appraisal and that<br \/>\nthe High Court had erred in fixing qualifying marks for<br \/>\ninterview.  In this connection, it was pointed out that the<br \/>\nSelection Board had prescribed 100 marks out of 300 for<br \/>\ninterview which the High Court has held to be on the higher<br \/>\nside.  He submitted that the High Court had erred in coming to<br \/>\nthe conclusion that non-selection of respondent no.1 was on<br \/>\naccount of extraneous factors.  He submitted that the covering<br \/>\nletter enclosing the mark-sheet has been signed by all the<br \/>\nmembers of the selection board.  Mr. Salve produced before us<br \/>\nthe entire record.  Per contra, Mr. A.B. Rohtagi, learned senior<br \/>\ncounsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 submitted that<br \/>\nthe individual members of the Selection Board have not<br \/>\nassigned individual marks in the mark-sheet and that all the<br \/>\nmembers have allotted equal marks and, therefore, the<br \/>\nprocedure was faulty.  He submitted that the mark list did not<br \/>\nbear the signatures of the members of the Board though all the<br \/>\nmembers have signed the forwarding letter.  It was urged that<br \/>\nno merit list was prepared and no policy was produced before<br \/>\nthe High Court on the basis of which marks came to be given.<br \/>\nHe submitted that the respondent was successful in the<br \/>\ninterview and for extraneous reasons, he was given less marks<br \/>\nfor his performance and consequently he could not obtain 170<br \/>\nmarks.  It was submitted that the High Court had examined the<br \/>\nentire record and has given finding of fact and, therefore, this<br \/>\nCourt should not interfere in this matter under <a href=\"\/doc\/427855\/\" id=\"a_1\">Article 136<\/a> of<br \/>\nthe Constitution.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\tWe are of the view that the High Court had erred in<br \/>\nsetting aside the selection and in directing the appellant bank to<br \/>\nconsider respondent no.1 for promotion from 1989.  The<br \/>\nappellant had constituted high power Selection Board presided<br \/>\nby a retired Judge of the Bombay High Court.  The Selection<br \/>\nBoard, as stated above, held interviews of candidates from<br \/>\nvarious centers at all India level.  The Selection Board held its<br \/>\nsitting at Calcutta, New Delhi, Bombay and Bangalore.  It<br \/>\nprovided for 200 marks for service records and 100 marks for<br \/>\ninterview in terms of the policy formulated by the management<br \/>\nas far back as July, 1983.  Under that policy, the candidates<br \/>\nwere required to obtain aggregate qualifying marks of 170 out<br \/>\nof 300.  The Board was entitled to formulate its own procedure.<br \/>\nMoreover, we have perused the records and proceedings of the<br \/>\nSelection Board produced before us.  The forwarding letter<br \/>\nenclosing the mark-sheets has been signed by all the members<br \/>\nof the Board.  There is no interpolation in the marks given to<br \/>\nthe candidates as alleged.  On facts it cannot be said, as held by<br \/>\nthe High Court, that the Board had taken into account<br \/>\nextraneous factors.  Hence, the High Court erred in setting aside<br \/>\nthe selection and directing the appellant bank to consider the<br \/>\ncase of respondent no.1 for promotion to Grade-D from 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\tFor the aforestated reasons, we hold that there was no<br \/>\nmisconduct committed by respondent no.1 and the appellant<br \/>\nhad erred in imposing the penalty on respondent no.1 of<br \/>\nlowering his substantive pay by one stage permanently.<br \/>\nHowever, we hold that the High Court had erred in setting aside<br \/>\nthe selection made by the Selection Board and directing the<br \/>\nappellant to reframe selection and consider respondent no.1 for<br \/>\npromotion to scale-D from 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">\tAccordingly, the appeal stands partly allowed, with no<br \/>\norder as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 Author: Kapadia Bench: Cji, S.B. Sinha, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 7803 of 2002 PETITIONER: Reserve Bank of India &amp; Another RESPONDENT: C. L. Toora &amp; Others DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/04\/2004 BENCH: CJI,S.B. SINHA [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-258664","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1643,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\",\"name\":\"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004","datePublished":"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004"},"wordCount":1643,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004","name":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-13T12:13:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/reserve-bank-of-india-another-vs-c-l-toora-others-on-5-april-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Reserve Bank Of India &amp; Another vs C. L. Toora &amp; Others on 5 April, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258664","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=258664"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258664\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258664"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258664"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258664"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}