K.Kannan, J. (Oral)
1. The writ petition contains a challenge to an amendment brought through Section 45(s) of the RBI Act of 1934 restricting a partnership to accept deposits from not more than 25 depositors per partner and not more than 250 depositors in all. The amendment was brought for regulating the operations of nonbanking financial institutions and to brought large scale fraud by flybynite operators. The amendment has public interest as its sole objective, when it was the experience that large deposits were garnered by the fraudulent nonCivil banking financial institutions and unwary poor persons became victims of allurements for return of deposits with hefty interest. The constitutional vires of the amending provision has been upheld by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in T. Velayudhan Achari and another Versus Union of India and others(1993) 1 SCC 582. The Hon''ble Supreme Court cautioned a handoff approach to legislation promoting economic policy while dealing with the same provision in Bhavesh D. Parish Versus Union of India and another(2000) 5 SCC 471. The subsequent amendment by Act 23 of 1997 of 01.04.1997 was also upheld in Kerala Small Financier''s Association Versus Union of India(2002) 10 SCC 537.
2. The challenge contained in this writ petition is, therefore, untenable. The writ petition is dismissed.
