Jhoratun Firdous v. Union Of India And ORS.

AD-20 Ct No.09 25.07.2023 TN WPA No. 16748 of 2023 Johratun Firdous Vs.

Union of India and others Mr. Achyut Basu, Ms. Punam Basu, Mr. Rupchand Chakraborty, Mr. Somen Bose, Mr. Anirban Saha, Mr. Srikumar Chakraborty .... for the petitioner Mr. Brajesh Jha, Mr. Anindo Bhattacharjee .... for the UOI Despite service, none appears for the bank, although the Union of India is represented through counsel, at the time of call.

The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite the extant Rules, the respondent no. 6, that is, the Branch Manager of the Union Bank of India, has not yet considered the application for educational loan filed by the petitioner, which is also annexed at page-25 of the present writ petition.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is clear that the respondent no. 6 ought to have decided the application of the petitioner expeditiously, within the outer limit of one month. However, since the same has not been decided till date, it is expected

that the respondent no. 6 shall comply with the order passed herein and decide on the same immediately. Accordingly, WPA No. 16748 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 6 to decide on the application for educational loan made by the petitioner, which is annexed as Annexure P-2 at page-25 of the present writ petition, within a week from the date of communication of this order to the respondent no. 6. The said respondent shall act on the server copy of this order, without insisting upon prior production of a certified copy, for compliance with the same.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)