SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Mad) 2132

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
S. Saran Kumar
Versus
The Regional Manager, Karur Vysya Bank, Trichy
W.P.No.8780 of 2010
Decided On : 12-05-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Hema Sampath Senior Counsel for Ms. S. Pandimadevy, Advocates. For the Respondents:A.V. Radhakrishnan, Advocate.

The purpose of the educational loan scheme was to encourage education among students, and there was no prohibition to sanction education loan to students admitted in the management quota.

Headnote:

EDUCATIONAL LOAN - Admission under Management Quota - Vidya Jyothi Educational Loan Scheme - 2007-2008 - [Indian Banks Association, Reserve Bank of India] - The court found that the bank's rejection of the educational loan application based on admission under the management quota was contrary to the scheme announced by the respondents. The court emphasized that the purpose of the scheme was to encourage education among students and that there was no prohibition to sanction education loan to students admitted in the management quota. The court directed the respondents to sanction education loan to the petitioner based on his application already submitted and sanction the eligible amount within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash the order declining to sanction an educational loan and to direct the respondents to sanction the loan for pursuing a B.E. Degree course. The petitioner was admitted under the management quota and belonged to the most backward community. The second respondent rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner was admitted under the management quota and not through the selection process.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the rejection of the educational loan application based on admission under the management quota was contrary to the scheme announced by the respondents. The court emphasized that the purpose of the scheme was to encourage education among students and that there was no prohibition to sanction education loan to students admitted in the management quota. The court directed the respondents to sanction education loan to the petitioner based on his application already submitted and sanction the eligible amount within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner, admitted under the management quota, was entitled to sanction of an educational loan as per the Vidya Jyothi Educational Loan Scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rejection of the educational loan application based on admission under the management quota was contrary to the scheme announced by the respondents. The court emphasized that the purpose of the scheme was to encourage education among students and that there was no prohibition to sanction education loan to students admitted in the management quota.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to sanction education loan to the petitioner based on his application already submitted and sanction the eligible amount within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Judgment :-

.1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of the second respondent dated 4. 2010 declining to sanction educational loan to the petitioner and direct the respondents to sanction educational loan to the petitioner, who is pursuing B.E. Degree course in Electronics and Communication in MRK Institute of Technology, Nattarmangalam Village, Kattumannarkoil-608301, a Self-Finance Private Engineering College.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a resident of Puducherry Union Territory, and is undergoing B.E.degree course in Electronics and Communication course in MRK Institute of Technology, Nattarmangalam Village, Kattumannarkoil-608301. Now the petitioner is doing second semester. The course in which the petitioner is undergoing B.E degree is approved by the AICTE and College is affiliated to Anna University, Trichy. Petitioner was selected in management quota and he belongs to most backward community (MBC). According to the petitioner, he is the first member in his family to pursue higher studies.

3. Petitioner states that the course fee is Rs.2,50,000/-apart from hostel charges and expenses towards purchase of books. Approximately a sum of Rs.90,000/-is required for one semester towards fees and expenses. Petitioner paid the first semester fees and charges and is yet to pay the fees for the second semester.

4. The petitioner applied for the sanction of educational loan of Rs.3,40,000/- before the second respondent along with his parents. On 4. 2010 the second respondent rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner was admitted under the management quota and not through selection process. The said order is challenged in this writ petition by contending that the petitioner is entitled to get educational loan as per the guidelines issued on 2. 2008 by the Indian Banks Association approved by the Reserve Bank of India; that the scheme nowhere states that the students admitted under the management quota are not eligible to avail loan facility; that the purpose for which the claim was introduced is defeated by the action of the second respondent by rejecting the request of the petitioner raising technicalities.

5. When the writ petition was posted for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to serve notice to the respondent bank through telegram, pursuant to which Mr.A.V.Radhakrishnan, learned standing counsel for the respondent bank appeared and argued the writ petition based on the instructions given by the respondent bank.

6. Thelearned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the scheme for the sanction of loan, framed by the Central Government as well as the Reserve Bank of India is bound to be followed by the respondents and the action of the respondents in declining sanction of education loan on the ground that the petitioner was admitted in the College in the management quota, is not only contrary to the scheme but also arbitrary and whimsical and the petitioner, who is a deserving candidate, is entitled to get sanction of education loan for his pursuing the B.E. Degree course.

.7. The learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that the scheme of the bank provides sanction of education loan to the students, who are admitted under the single window selection and the petitioner having been admitted in the management quota, is not entitled to sanction loan and there is no illegality in the impugned order.

8. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondents.

9. The respondent Bank announced the scheme -Vidya Jyothi Educational Loan Scheme for the year 2007-2008. The eligibility criteria provided therein are that a candidate must be an Indian national, secured admission to professional/technical course in India or abroad through entrance test/merit based selection process. The course of study mentioned for the sanction of loan includes regular degree/diploma c









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top