Disposed

G.Santhanam, S/O.Gopalan, v. the District Collector

Madras HC4 Feb 2019WP(MD)/7560/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an SC petitioner seeking a loan for a dairy farm. The Court held its jurisdiction was limited and directed the Banking Ombudsman to dispose of the petitioner's complaint.

What did the court decide?

The Banking Ombudsman was directed to dispose of the petitioner's complaint on merits within six weeks.

G.Santhanam, S/O.Gopalan, Vs the District… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04.02.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

WP(MD)No.7560 of 2018 and WMP(MD)No.7205 of 2018

G.Santhanam

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.

¶11

2.The District Manager,

¶12

Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing & Development Corporation,

¶13

Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

¶14

3.The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Kariapatti Branch, Virudhunagar District.

¶15

4.The Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai – 600 001. ... Respondents

¶16

(R4 is suo motu impleaded vide court order dated 04.02.2019)

¶17

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the third respondent dated 17.02.2018 served on to the petitioner on 02.03.2018 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to grant the loan as per loan application of the petitioner dated 01.08.2017 recommended by the second respondent on 22.12.2017 to the third respondent to commence Farm Dairy.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Appadurai

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajarajan, Government Advocate

¶20

for R1 & R2 Mr.Pala Ramasamy for R3

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He had https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ applied for a loan under Adi Dravidar Welfare Scheme for organizing a Dairy Farm. It appears that originally the petitioner's case was recommended and thereafter the third respondent did an about-turn.

¶23

¶24

Hence, seeking a direction for disbursement of loan, this writ petition has been filed.

¶25

2.I am of the view that in such matters, the jurisdiction of this Court is rather limited. In any event, the petitioner can very well move the Banking Ombudsman at Chennai. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he would file a detailed complaint to the Ombudsman, Chennai. The bank Ombudsman is suo moto impleaded as the fourth respondent in this writ petition.

¶26

3.The fourth respondent is directed to dispose of the said complaint to be filed by the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the complaint by the petitioner. Since this direction is given in the absence of the learned standing counsel for the third respondent, the third respondent is directed to cooperate for speedy disposal of the said complaint. The third respondent shall not take adjournment before the Bank Ombudsman.

¶27

4.With these directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶28

Assistant Registrar

¶29

// True Copy //

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶31

Skm To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.

¶32

2.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing & Development Corporation,

¶33

Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

¶34

3.The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Kariapatti Branch, Virudhunagar District.

¶35

4.The Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai – 600 001.

¶36

+1CC TO MR.K.APPADURAI, Advocate Sr. No.44688 +1CC TO MR.PALA RAMASAMY, Advocate Sr. No.45223 +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR.No.44967

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶38

WP(MD)No.7560 of 2018 and WMP(MD)No.7205 of 2018

¶39

TR (11.04.2019) 2P 8C

G.Santhanam, S/O.Gopalan, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Santhanam, S/O.Gopalan, v. the District Collector

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

A.G.Shankar, Vs Belics John Baskaran

Sumathi, W/O.Kanagasabapathy, Vs Elango, S/O.Ponnaiah

Murugapandi Vs the Inspector of Police

Jeyaleela Carunia Vs the District Collector

Anbarasan Vs the Inspector of Police

Happy(Hygiene Awareness Vs the Commissioner