New Delhi, Jan 8 (IANS) The Delhi High Court on Thursday stayed a single-judge direction that required the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to institute a second level of human review for consumer complaints dismissed by its banking ombudsman.

A division bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia passed the interim order on an appeal filed by the RBI against a ruling delivered by Justice Prathiba M. Singh, which required such reviews to be conducted by legally trained professionals, including retired judicial officers or lawyers with a minimum of ten years’ experience.

While staying the impugned directions, the CJ Upadhyaya-led Bench observed that, prima facie, it found force in the submissions advanced on behalf of the RBI.

“Accordingly, we provide that the directions contained in paragraph 47(5) and 48 of the impugned judgment by the learned single judge dated November 27, 2025, shall remain stayed,” it ordered.

The bench also stayed the single-judge’s direction requiring the RBI Deputy Governor to submit a compliance affidavit by January 15, 2026. The matter has now been scheduled for further hearing on March 17.

Appearing for the RBI, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta submitted that the single judge had travelled beyond the permissible scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The Centre’s second-highest law officer submitted that the Reserve Bank-Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021, is a statutory scheme framed under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act and Section 18 of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, and can be altered or modified only by authorities empowered under those enactments.

In her November 27, 2025, ruling, Justice Prathiba M. Singh had expressed concern over complaints being rejected through “system-generated responses” and held that the Ombudsman Scheme must be “an effective Scheme and not a mere toothless division of the RBI”.

The judgment was delivered in a writ petition filed by advocate Sarwar Raza, who had approached the Delhi High Court alleging harassment and wrongful rejection of his complaints by the RBI Ombudsman following a disputed credit card transaction of Rs 76,777.

The single-judge Bench had directed the RBI to ensure that customer complaints are not rejected merely through a mechanised process and that complainants should be given an opportunity to correct minor errors.

It had further ordered that whenever complaints are finally rejected, they must undergo a second level of human supervision by legally trained personnel, observing: “If the complaint redressal mechanism adopted by the Ombudsman is made more effective and efficient, litigation in courts and consumer forum/s can be reduced considerably.”

–IANS

pds/vd