Disposed¶25

R.Kishor Ram v. The Chief Manager

Madras HC2 Dec 2025WP(MD)/11369/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), W.P.(MD)No.11369 of 2025, decided 02.12.2025 by Justice R. Vijayakumar. Education loan refusal by State Bank of India, Kilakkarai Branch; property/collateral documents held defective; writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 to quash rejection and direct loan of Rs.28,87,780/-; Court held loan-granting is the bank's discretion subject to its rules and regulations and declined to compel disbursal; petitioner free to approach another bank; petition disposed of, no costs; connected W.M.P(MD)No.8439 of 2025 closed. No precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Granting an education loan is within the discretion of the bank concerned, subject to the bank's rules and regulations. ¶21

R.Kishor Ram Vs The Chief Manager — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order passed by the third respondent rejecting the petitioner's request for disbursal of the education loan should be quashed. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order rejecting the education loan request.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Granting an education loan is within the discretion of the bank concerned, subject to the bank's rules and regulations.

¶21

Key takeaways

Unless the petitioner convinces the bank with regard to compliance of its rules and collateral requirements, this Court cannot compel the bank to lend an educational loan.ratio¶21
Observation made while disposing: the rejection order of the third respondent is in no way a legal impediment for the petitioner to approach some other bank.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Madurai Bench of Madras High Court), W.P.(MD)No.11369 of 2025, decided on 02.12.2025 by R. Vijayakumar, J.: Petitioner, invoking Article 226, sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order dated 11.04.2025 (SBI-KILAKKARAI/02223/2025-26) of the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kilakkarai Branch (third respondent), whereby his request for disbursal of an educational loan was rejected on the ground that the property documents submitted were defective, and further sought a direction to grant an educational loan of Rs.28,87,780/- considering the collateral security furnished. HELD: granting an education loan is within the discretion of the bank concerned, however subject to its rules and regulations; unless the petitioner convinces the bank regarding compliance of the rules and collaterals, the High Court cannot compel the bank to lend; the Court was therefore not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, observing that the rejection order is not a legal impediment for the petitioner to approach some other bank. Writ petition disposed of; no costs; connected W.M.P(MD)No.8439 of 2025 closed.

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 02.12.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.11369 of 2025

¶6

and

¶7

W.M.P(MD)No.8439 of 2025

¶8

R.Kishor Ram

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Retail Asset Credit Centre, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

¶11

The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

¶12

The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kilakkarai Branch, No.23, East Street, Kilakkarai 623 517, Ramanathapuram District.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

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 pertaining to the Impugned order in SBI-KILAKKARAI/02223/2025-26 dated.11.04.2025 on the file of the Respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the Respondents to grant educational loan to the tune

¶15

1/4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

of Rs.28,87,780/- (Twenty Eight Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty Rupees only) to the Petitioner by considering the collateral security furnished by the petitioner within the time period stipulated by this Court.

¶18

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order passed by the third respondent herein wherein the request of the petitioner for disbursal of the education loan has been rejected.

¶21

A perusal of the impugned order passed by the third respondent on 11.04.2025 reveals that the property documents submitted by the writ petitioner were found to be defective by the bank. Based upon the said observations, the request of the petitioner for education loan has been rejected. It is for the petitioner to convince the bank to get loan from the said bank. Granting education loan is within the discretion of the bank concerned, however, subject to the rules and regulations. Unless the petitioner convinces the bank with regard to the compliance of the rules and collaterals, this Court cannot compel the bank to lend educational loan. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order. However, the order of the third respondent is

¶22

2/4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

not in any way be a legal impediment for the petitioner to approach some other bank.

¶25

With the above said observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶26

02.12.2025

¶27

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR

¶28

¶29

The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Retail Asset Credit Centre, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. 2. The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kilakkarai Branch, No.23, East Street, Kilakkarai 623 517, Ramanathapuram District.

¶30

3/4

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

¶33

RJR

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.11369 of 2025

¶35

02.12.2025