Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

D.Vadivel vs The Chief General Manager

Madras High Court|22 July, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. By consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
3. This writ petition has been filed, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the letter, dated 13.9.2007, issued by the second respondent and to direct the respondents to grant educational loan of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner, to enable his daughter to complete her Teacher Training Course.
4. The petitioner has stated that he had submitted an application for the grant of an educational loan of Rs.1,50,000/- for his daughter, Ms.V.Vadivurathinam, who had joined in the Teacher Training Course. However, the second respondent had rejected the application by his letter, dated 13.9.2007, stating that the institution, in which the student is studying, is not run by a reputed College or University, as per the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India and that the fees quotation for the course is Rs.1,15,000/-, as against the approved fees of Rs.6500/-, fixed by the Government.
5. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted, that he is prepared to give immovable property security, as required by the State Bank of India, for the sanctioning of a loan of Rs.60,000/- in favour of the petitioner, which could be paid by the Bank to the Teacher Training College, directly.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the education loan could be sanctioned by the respondent Bank, only in respect of the fees authorised by the Government. However, since the petitioner could not produce sufficient evidence, with regard to the Government authorised fees of the Teacher Training College, the loan amount requested by the petitioner could not be sanctioned.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, the third respondent, who is the appropriate authority, to sanction the loan in favour of the petitioner, is directed to sanction an amount of Rs.60,000/-, as educational loan to the petitioner, on his giving sufficient immovable property security. The sanctioned amount may be paid to the Teacher Training College concerned, directly. On the petitioner fulfilling the necessary formalities, the third respondent is expected to sanction the loan, as expeditiously as possible, not later than four weeks, thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
csh To
1.The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Circle Top House, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
2.The Regional Manager Regional Commercial Branch State Bank of India, No.15, Rue Suffron/2nd Floor, Puducherry 605 001.
3.The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Thirukoilur Branch, Thirukoilur Post, Villupuram District 606 205
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

D.Vadivel vs The Chief General Manager

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
22 July, 2009