A writ petition seeking mandamus to direct the Bank to reconsider a rejected loan application under the Central Government’s SEPY Scheme was disposed of. The court held that the petitioner must satisfy all banking norms and that the loan transaction is essentially contractual.
No relief granted; petitioner allowed to approach the bank after satisfying norms.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.07.2023
CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
M.Sudhakar .. Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Manager Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation (TAHDCO) TAHDCO Training Centre Building No.183, Muthuvinayagar Koil Street Backside of Main Bus Stand Thiruvannamalai - 606 601.
2.The Zonal Officer FI&RBD Section Indian Bank STR BSNL Building Vellore Road Thiruvannamalai - 606 601. 3.The Branch Manager Indian Bank Melarani Branch Thiruvannamalai. .. Respondents
1/5
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second and third respondents to consider afresh the loan application submitted by the petitioner under SEPY Scheme in Acknowledgement No.TAHDCO-202122-SEFY-TM-87 dated 05.09.2021 along with reply dated 27.06.2022 submitted by the petitioner and consequently sanction loan in favour of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Bhagawat Krishna
For Respondents : Mr.M.Bindran Additional Government Pleader [R1] Mr.S.Saravana Prakash [R2 & R3]
ORDER
The petitioner had applied a loan with the third respondent-Bank through online on 05.09.2021, for availing the benefit under the 'Self-Employment Programme for Youth (SEPY)' launched by the Central Government for the welfare of the Schedule Caste youth in the age group of 18 to 45 years. The loan application of the petitioner was rejected by the third respondent vide its communication dated 02.03.2022. The petitioner has now filed this petition for a direction to the third respondent to reconsider his application.
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
appearing for the respective respondents.
that the loan was rejected to the petitioner on the following grounds :
between the lender and the borrower.
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
07.07.2023
Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order ds
To:
1.The District Manager Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation (TAHDCO) TAHDCO Training Centre Building No.183, Muthuvinayagar Koil Street Backside of Main Bus Stand Thiruvannamalai - 606 601.
2.The Zonal Officer FI&RBD Section Indian Bank STR BSNL Building Vellore Road Thiruvannamalai - 606 601.
3.The Branch Manager Indian Bank Melarani Branch Thiruvannamalai.
4/5
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
N.SESHASAYEE.J.,
ds
W.P.No.18508 of 2022
07.07.2023
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct the bank to reconsider the rejected loan application under the SEPY Scheme.
M.Sudhakar
District Manager, Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation
Zonal Officer, FI&RBD Section, Indian Bank
Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Melarani Branch
N.Seshasayee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
