CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION versus HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 1 S.C.R. 401 · Decided: 03-01-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Directions issued

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] I S.C.R. 401 
CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 
v. 
HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. 
& ORS. 
(Writ Petition (C) No. 573 of2003) 
JANUARY 03, 20 17 
(T.S. THAKUR, CJI, A.M. KHANWILKAR AND, 
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.) 
Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Jnslitutions 
Act. 1993- EnforcemenJ of Security /merest and Recovery of Debt 
Laws and Miscellaneous Provisions (Amendment) Act, 2016 -
Requirement of expeditious disposal of proceedings before the Debt 
Recut•ery Triburrals - Legislative cha,ges may not by themselves 
achieve the intended object so long as infra~·tructure provided to 
the Tribu11als is not commensurate with the burde11 of the work and 
nature of judicial duties- Union Government directed to file affidavit 
dealing with various i:rsues in regard to infrastructure of Debt 
Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals. 
Parliament enacted the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks 
and Financial Institutions Act, J993 for providing for the 
estaNishment of tribunals and appellate tribunals for expeditious 
adjudication and recovery of dues to banks and financial 
institutions. Subsequently, in order to deal with tbe large pendency 
of c:ases,the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of 
Debt Laws and Miscellaneous Provisions (Amendment) Act, 2016 
has been enaded. 
Issuing directions, the Court 
HELD: 1. Legislative ~banges to provide ror expeditious 
disposal of proceedings before tbc Debt Recovery Tr.ibunals may 
not by themselves achieve the intended object so long as the 
infrastructure provided to the Tribunals is not commensurate with 
the burden of the work and nature of judicial duties. Tbe Debt 
Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals suffer from a lack or 
adequate infrastructure, manpower and resou"es. Haviag due 
regard to the importaat adjudicatory function whiclt ia entruatcd 
401 
A 
8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
.H 
402 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[20 17] I S.C .R. 
A 
to these Tribunals, the efficaty of parliamentary legislation will 
depend in a large measure on the efficiency with which the 
Tribunals discharge their duties. (Para 4) (403-H; 404-A-CJ 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
2. The Union Government is directed to file an affidavit 
specificaJiy dealing with the following issues: (i) Whether the 
timelines set down in the amended legislation are capable of being 
achieved with the existing infrastructure including judicial 
personnel and staffing pattern of the Debt Recovery Tribunals 
and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals; (ii) The underlying basis, 
if any, upon which the revised timelines have been stipulated and 
whether any scientific study has been conducted on the 
availability of infrastructure; (iii) Whether, and if so, what steps 
the Union government intends to adopt to enhance the 
infrastructure of Debt Recovery Tribunals and the Appellate 
Tribunals in terms of physical infrastructure, judicial manpower 
and non-judicial personnel required for the efficacious functioning 
of the Tribunals; (iv) The specific plan of action including time-
S(bedules within which the existing infrastrudure would be 
upgraded so as to achieve the time frame for disposal indicated 
in the amended legislation; and (v) Empirical data on the pendency 
of cases for more than teo years and tlte list of corporate entities 
where the amount outstanding is in excess of Rs.500 crore. 
However, the direction for filing of affidavit shall not in any manner 
affect the functioning of the Committee which has already been 
constituted by the Union government. (Paras 5, 6] (404-D-GJ 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 
573 of2003. 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia. 
Ranjit Kumar. SG, Jaideep Gupta, ·sr. Adv., Prashant Shushan, 
Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Devesh Kumar Agnihotri, Govind Jee. Rohit Kumar 
Singh, R. Chandrachud, Ms. Binu Tamta, D.L.Chidananda, R.K. Venna, 
R. R.Rajesh, Ms. Anil Katiyar, Kuldeep S. Parihar, H.S.Parihar, Pranab 
Kumar Mullick, Ms. Soma Mullick, Sebat Kumar Deuria, A. Chatterjee, 
Mudit Sharma, Ms. Nina Gupta, Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Ranu Purohit, 
Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Vishal Gehrana, Milanda Sharma, Ms. Manik 
Karanjawala, Pankaj Pandey, P. Panneswaran, Rajeev Sharma, Vikas 
Mehta, Advs. for the appearing parties. 
CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION v. HOUSING & 403 
URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. I. Prior to the establishment 
of Debt Recovery Tribunals, as on 30 Sept

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.