Madras High CourtWP/32531/2012disposed of

K.Gomathi v. The Branch Manager

2015-02-24Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.02.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WP.No.32531 of 2012 K.Gomathi .. Petitioner vs.

The Branch Manager Indian Bank Thirunavalur Villupuram District.

.. Respondent Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to sanction and disburse the educational loan to the petitioner by considering her application dated 20.07.2012. For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail For Respondent : Mr.V.Kalyanaraman

ORDER

Heard Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.V.Kalyanaraman, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner seeks for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to sanction and disburse the educational loan based on her application dated 20.07.2012.

3. When the matter came up before this Court, earlier on 31.01.2013, this Court issued the following direction: "Mr.V.Kalyanaraman, learned counsel appearing for respondent-Bank represents that the Bank has requested the petitioner certain particulars for disbursement of the loan and as and when particulars are furnished, the Bank will disburse the educational loan. Therefore, counsel for petitioner is directed to inform the petitioner to go to the respondent-Bank and furnish the particulars required by the Bank .."

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. However, when the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that till date the direction passed by this Court has not been complied with by the respondentBank.

5. It is seen that this Court had sufficiently safe-guarded the interest of the respondent-Bank and issued an interim direction directing the petitioner to furnish all particulars as requested by the Bank and thereafter directed the bank to consider the matter. It is not known under what circumstances, the respondent-Bank has not complied with the direction.

Hence, this Court is of the view that the writ petition should be disposed of with appropriate direction to the Respondent-bank.

6. In the light of the above, there will be a direction to the respondent-Bank to take note of the earlier direction issued by this Court on 31.01.2013 to consider the petitioner's application for grant of education loan. If any further particulars are required, the same shall be called for from the petitioner and the loan amount shall be sanctioned in accordance with the guidelines of the respondent- bank, if not the same is already considered.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar vj2 To The Branch Manager Indian Bank Thirunavalur Villupuram District.

1 cc to M/s.A. Mohd Ismail, Advocate, sr. 10170 WP.No.32531 of 2012 MP (CO) kk 11/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/