Disposed

S.K.Sindhu v. The Branch Manager

Madras HC13 Sept 2017WP/8027/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Bank to sanction an educational loan of Rs.9,25,000. Finding the respondent did not appear, the Court directed the Bank to consider the application and pass necessary orders within four weeks before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Bank to consider educational loan application dated 14.11.2016 and pass necessary orders within four weeks; writ petition disposed of.

S.K.Sindhu Vs The Branch Manager — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.09.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶6

W.P.No.8027 of 2017
S.K.Sindhu ..Petitioner
Vs
The Branch Manager,
Axis Bank,Gudiyatham Branch,
Vellore District. ...Respondent

¶7

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent Bank to sanction and disburse the educational loan of Rs.9,25,000/- to the petitioner for the entire 4 academic years as per the fee structure of the institution to the petitioner for the Bachelor Degree (Electronics and Communication Engineering), in Easwari Engineering College, Bharathi Salai, Ramapuram, Chennai-600 089.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Vinodh Kumar For Respondent : No appearance O R D E R

¶9

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition, to issue a Writ of

¶10

Mandamus, directing the respondent Bank to sanction and disburse the

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

¶13

educational loan of Rs.9,25,000/- to the petitioner for the entire 4 academic years as per the fee structure of the Institution to the petitioner for the Bachelor Degree (Electronics and Communication Engineering) in Easwari Engineering College, Bharathi Salai, Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089.

¶14

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has given his application for availing educational loan as early as on 14.11.2016. However, the respondent has not sanctioned the loan till this date. The learned counsel also submitted that the District Collector, Vellore, has also recommended for the sanction of the

¶15

educational loan enabling the petitioner to undergo the course.

¶16

Though notice was duly served on the respondent, none

¶17

appeared for the respondent.

¶18

In view of the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support

¶19

of the writ petition and also the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's educational loan application, dated 14.11.2016, and

¶20

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶21

¶22

pass necessary suitable orders in accordance with law, within a period

¶23

of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

5. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. No

¶25

costs.
13.09.2017
sk
To
The Branch Manager,
Axis Bank,
Gudiyatham Branch,
Vellore District.

¶26

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.DURAISWAMY, J.

W.P.No.8027 of 2017
13.09.2017

¶31

http://www.judis.nic.in

S.K.Sindhu v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.K.Sindhu v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Manickavelu, Vs G.Subramani

N.Murali Vs The Regional Transport

S.Padmanabhan, Vs The District Collector

A.Karuppaiah, Vs The Commissioner of

T.Valliammal Vs The District Collector

Shabuddeen Vs Tamil Nadu Wakf Board