Madras High CourtWP/30378/2015dismissed

V.Asaithambi, v. The Secretary,

2020-09-15Honourable Mrs Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA W.P.No.30378 of 2015 & M.P.No.1 of 2015 V. Asaithambi ... Petitioner vs

1. The Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi-1.

2. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, Plot No. 5-B, 6th Floor, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003.

3. The Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi-1.

4. The Regional Director, Reserve Bank of India, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1.

5. The Chairman/Managing Director, Indian Bank, Corporate Office, No.254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Chennai-14.

6. The Chief Manager, Indian Bank, Zonal Office, MSME Department, No.15/1, Divya Towers, III Floor, Fort Main Road, Salem - 636 001.

7. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Kolathur, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to take necessary action in pursuant to the petitioners representation dated 31.08.2015 against the respondent Nos.6 & 7 for not processing and granting the loan to the petitioner and to enlist the borrowers names in the official websites of the respective banks periodically. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam For Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr.J.Vasu for Mr.G.Venkatesan For Respondent - 2 : No Appearance For Respondent-4 : Mr.C.Mohan for M/s.King and Patridge For Respondents 5 to 7:Mr.O.S.Karthikeyan

ORDER

This writ petition is heard through Video-Conferencing, on account of the COVID-19 pandemic situation.

2. The writ petition has been filed for issuance of a mandamus directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to take necessary action in pursuant of petitioner's representation dated 31.08.2015 against the respondent Nos.6 & 7 for not processing and granting the loan to the petitioner and to enlist the borrowers names in the official websites of the respective banks periodically.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

4. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that subsequent to the assistance he had sought for from the respondent-Bank, he had applied for loan from M/s.Canara Bank and obtained financial assistance for revival of his business.

5. As his requirement has already been satisfied by one of the Banks though not by the respondent Nos.6 & 7 Banks, the prayer what he has sought for is unnecessary.

5. The petitioner has also not impleaded the person concerned, who according to him, had not sanctioned the loan within the stipulated time. Even without impleading the parties concerned, it will be difficult to issue mandamus as sought for by the petitioner.

6. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar asr/rsi To