Reserve Bank of India in an RTI response dated 03.09.2009 had mentioned that RB1 does not approve policy of foreclosure-charges on pre-payment of loans, but keeping short of issuing any directives. But subsequently foreclosure-charges in respect of home-loans were abolished by an RBI directive dated 05.06.2012 but only in respect of banks and not for Non-Banking-Financial-Companies (NBFC). However NBFCs themselves abolished foreclosure-charges in respect of home-loans due to their competition with banks in loan-business.
RBI through its circular dated 07.05.2014 abolished foreclosure-charges for all types of loans given by banks to individuals followed by another circular dated 14.07.2014 abolishing foreclosure charges being charged by NBFCs from individuals also but only on loans with floating rate of interest. Both banks and NBFCs are taking exit-routes by not abolishing foreclosure-charges in case of others even like HUFs and individuals paying Equated Monthly Installments (EMIs) from their proprietorship firms. Instead of doing away with anti-public mahajan-like practice in piece-meal manner, RBI should issue directive to abolish concept of foreclosure-charges altogether for any category of loan-takers and for every type of loan including loans with fixed rates of interest both for banks and NBFCs.
Subhash Chandra Agrawal, Delhi
It refers to a letter dated 18.06.2015 written by Union Law Minister to Chief Justice of Delhi High Court about alleged corruption, favouritism and nepotism in the Delhi Judicial Services Examinations held last year after Department of Justice received many complaints on mode of conducting these examinations where sitting High Court judges framed question-papers and evaluated answer-sheets of candidates. Out of total 659 candidates appeared for the examinations, only 15 could be selected which included topper and another successful candidate being children of sitting High Court judges. Media-reports also indicate that the Delhi Judicial Service Examinations had to be cancelled in the year 1990 and re-conducted in the year 1991. Many unsuccessful candidates of the year 1990 were declared successful in the re-held examinations of the year 1991.
Social media also depicts that majority of the present judges in higher courts are from families of earlier judges. System of holding Judicial Services Examinations should be changed not only in Delhi but also in other states where bar-councils of other states may conduct examinations to prevent all types of favouritism and nepotism. It is also time that Indian Judicial Service (US) may be constituted on lines of Indian Administrative Service (IAS) for all appointments in judiciary right from lower courts to Supreme Court. All judges in High Courts should be compulsorily appointed from outside their home-states to effectively check local relations and former bar colleagues approaching them.
Madhu Agrawal, Delhi
Vol. 48, No. 4, Aug 2 - 8, 2015