S.N.Vidhya, v. The Branch Manager,
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 25.02.2019 Coram The Honourable Dr.Justice ANITA SUMANTH W.P.No.23275 of 2017 S.N.Vidhya
...Petitioner
Vs The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Indra Nagar Branch, Vadakumelur, Cuddalore.
..Respondent PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to sanction the education loan, based on the application given by the petitioner dated 17.10.2016. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ravi For Respondent : Mr.V.Kalyanaraman
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed by a student of Karpaga Vinayaga Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Maduranthagam, Kanchipuram contending that she was a meritorious student and got selection through counselling. In the aforesaid counselling, allotment order was received from the Directorate of Medical Education by the petitioner, pursuant to which, she had approached the respondent - Indian Bank, Indra Nagar Branch, Cuddalore seeking sanction of education loan on 17.10.2016. Loan sought for was for a sum of Rs.20,35,000/- for the entirety of the course, being hostel fee, books and special fee. Since, she did not receive any response from the Bank with regard to the sanction of the loan, she was constrained to approach this Court seeking mandamus directing the respondent to sanction educational loan sought.
2. Mr.V.Kalyanaraman, learned counsel appearing for the Bank vehemently denied that a mandamus is not justified in the present case, as according to him, the Bank had issued a letter dated 24.10.2018 requesting her to contact the bank during https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
business hours and the petitioner was given the guidelines of the bank that were in force which provide for security cover for the sanction of loan exceeding Rs.7.5 lakhs. When that were brought to the notice of the petitioner, according to the learned counsel for the respondent, she refused to provide the same and left in a huff. He submits that it is not possible for the Bank to sanction the loan without providing security.
3. I am of the view that the policy of the Bank, which provide for security cover in order to protect the interests of the Bank and the public money, is justified and cannot be interfered with.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would state that the petitioner is now in agreement to furnish security for obtaining loan.
5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the bank and provide security as may be required for sanction of the loan. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sl To The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Indra Nagar Branch, Vadakumelur, Cuddalore.
+1cc to M/S.M.Ravi, Advocate Sr.17567 W.P.No.23275 of 2017 rr[co] srg 19/03/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/