Don't file PILs based on newspaper reports: Delhi High Court on plea for probe into bank recruitment

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) probe into the use of external recruitment agencies or agents at public sector banks.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Tushar Rao Gedela pulled up the petitioner for filing the PIL based solely on news reports.

The petitioner had cited the irregularities in the recruitment process at Can Fin Homes Limited, a housing finance company, citing a report by NDTV Profit.

“Newspaper padh ke PIL mat file kariye. (Don't file PILs after reading newspapers). Are we a post office? A half-baked petition is filed on the basis of newspaper reports. Then depending on court to direct other party to file documents, asking court to examine. That is not how a PIL should proceed,” Chief Justice Upadhyaya said.

The petitioner said that the PIL was based on documentary evidence, whistleblower complaints, and media reports which point to serious irregularities in the recruitment process at Can Fin Homes.

It was stated that the reports also suggested manipulation of candidate assessments and undue influence of certain senior officials and third-party agencies.

However, the Court stressed that PIL jurisdiction should not be taken lightly.

“On what basis should we presume except a newspaper article saying scam, scam, scam? You are just relying on report by NDTV Profit which stated that some whistleblower had complained to bank, enquiry done, nothing was found and matter was closed. We cannot take cognisance of a news report unless it is corroborated. Will your material constitute enough material for the court to come to conclusion for filing an FIR,” the Court stated.

The Court also castigated the rampant practice of casually filing unnecessary PILs without sufficient research. 

“Did you approach the authority? You should have approached the regulator, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). You have to stand on your own footing. You cannot come with a half baked petition. Before seeking mandamus you have to approach the authority,” the Court stated.

The PIL was finally withdrawn.

In the PIL, the petitioner had highlighted the absence of a legal framework, arguing that scams undermine public confidence.

Therefore, he sought regulation of external recruitment companies/agents for public sector banks and their allied institutions.

“The alleged recruitment scam not only jeopardizes the careers of deserving candidates but also undermines public confidence in the integrity of recruitment processes within major financial institutions. The petitioner highlights that the absence of a robust legal and regulatory framework for third-party hiring creates fertile ground for abuse, and that existing policies are insufficient to prevent or address such malpractices,” the petition stated.