Kerala High Court
Joel S. Joy vs Bank Of Baroda
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/30TH KARTHIKA, 1939
W.P(C).No.26732 of 2017 (N)
-------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):-
---------------
1. JOEL S. JOY, AGED 18, S/O. JOY JOSEPH,
THULUSSERIL HOUSE, MUTTUCHIRA PO.,
KOTTAYAMDISTRICT, PIN-686613,
(APPLICANT), II SEMESTER B, TECH,
(COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING)
STUDENT,MANGALAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,
MANGALAM HILLS PO, ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686631
2. JOY JOSEPH, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH,
THULUSSERIL HOUSE, MUTTUCHIRA P.O.,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PIN-686613 (CO-APPLICANT).
BY ADVS.SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN
SMT.C.A.SEENA
RESPONDENT(S):-
---------------
1. BANK OF BARODA,
KURUPPUNTHARA BRANCH,
MANJOOR PO., KURUPPUNTHARA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686603,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
REGIONAL OFFICE, BANK OF BARODA,
VASUDEV BUILDING, T.D.ROAD, ERNAKULAM PIN-682011.
3. MANAGING DIRECTOR & C.E.O., BANK OF BARODA,
C-26, G-BLOCK, BANDRA, KURLA COMPLEX,
BANDRA (EAST), EAST, MUMBAI, PIN-400051,
4. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (CHNZ),
BANK OF BARODA, CHENNAI ZONAL OFFICE,
BARODA PRIDE, NO.41, IIND FLOOR,
LUZ CURCH ROAD, MYLAPOORE, CHENNAI, PIN-600004.
ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED:
------------------------------------
ADDL.R5. MANGALAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ETTUMANOOR,
KOTTAYAM - 686 631.
ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 18.08.2017 IN I.A.NO.13334 OF 2017.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.ANEESH
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR (KALIYANAM)
R1 BY ADV. SRI.ADARSH KUMAR
R1 BY ADV. SRI.BIJU VARGHESE ABRAHAM
R1 BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP CHANDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
21-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).No.26732 of 2017 (N)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:-
-------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPYOF THE CBSE, SECONDARY SCHOOL EXAMINATION
(10TH) SESSION 2012-14) GRADE SHEET CUM CERTIFICATE OF
PERFORMANCE WITH ROLL NO.4172476 IN THE NAME OF THE
1ST PETITIONER, DATED 19.05.2014.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CBSE, SENIOR SCHOOL CERTIFICATE
EXAMINATION (+2) 2016 MARKS STATEMENT WITH ROLL
NO.4810224 IN THE NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER,
DATED 21.05.2016
EXHIBIT P2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE CBSE,SENIOR SCHOOL CERTIFICATE
EXAMINATION (+2) 2016 CERTIFICATE WITH ROLL NO.4810224
IN THE NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER, DATED 21.05.2016.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE 6TH PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWSPAPER DATED 19.03.2016 PUBLISHING THE NEW RELATING
TO THE CBSE MATHEMATICS EXAMIATION 2016.
EXHIBIT P3(A): TRUE COPY OF THE 6TH PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWSPAPER DATED 15.03.2016 PUBLISHING THE NEWS RELATING
TO THE CBSE MATHEMATICS EXAMIATION 2016.
EXHIBIT P 3(B: TRUE COPY OF THE 10TH PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWSPAPER DATED 16.03.2016 PUBLISHING THE NEWS RELATING
TO THE CBSE MATHEMATICS EXAMIATION 2016.
EXHIBIT P3(C): TRUE COPY OF THE 10TH PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWSPAPER DATED 17/03/2016 PUBLISHING THE NEWS RELATING
TO THE CBSE MATHEMATICS EXAMIATION 2016.
EXHIBIT P3(D): TRUE COPY OF THE 6TH PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWSPAPER DATED 21.03.2016 PUBLISHING THE NEWS RELATING
TO THE CBSE MATHEMATICS EXAMIATION 2016.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COLLEGE BROCHURE DURING 2016 DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P4(A): TRUE COPY OF THE COLLEGE BROCHURE DURING 2017, AFTER
ACCREDITATION OF THE NAAC DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPIES OF THEDOCUMENT SREGARDING APPROVAL OF THE
COLLEGE BY ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION
(AICTE), FILE NO.SOUTH/WEST 2814409127/2016/EOA/
CORRIGENDUM-1 DATED 11.05.2016.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFILIATION OF THE COLLEGE TO APJ
ABDUL KALAM TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY (KTU)
NO.KTU/A 456/2015 DATED 14.05.2016.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE FEES STRUCTURE ISSUED BY THE MANGALAM
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING NO.MLMCE/FS /BTECH/2016/05
DATED 25.08.2016 FOR RS.5,02.500/-.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPYOF THE LOAN APPLICATION DATED 06.09.2016 WITH
APPLICATION ID 63197 OF 2016.
W.P(C).No.26732 of 2017 (N) - 2 -
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION TO THE CANARA BANK,
KADUTHURUTHY BRANCH DATED 06.9.2016.
EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION TO THE INDIAN BANK,
KADUTHURUTHY BRANCH DATED 06.09.2016.
EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE RATION CARD NO.1525041816 ISSUE DBY
THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA IN WHICH THE PETITIONER IS THE
APPLICANT AND CO-APPLICANT DATED 24.12.2008.
EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED GUARANTOR FORM DATED NIL IN
THE NAME OF MR.JOBIN C. THARIAN.
EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD OF THE HONURABLE LABOUR COURT,
ERNAKULAM IN I.D NO.3/2011 DATED 17.12.2012.
EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION HISTORY FOR APPLICATION
ID 63197 OF THE VIDHYA LAKSHMI PORTAL DATED 26.03.2017.
EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE GRIEVANCE HISTORY CHAT HISTROY FOR
GRIEVANCE I.D 63197 DATED 24.2.2017.
EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMPLAINT DATED 20.02.2017.
EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMPLAINT DATED 24.02.2017
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR & CEO
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.
EXHIBIT P18: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
NO.RBI/2012-13/291/RPCD.MSME&
NFS.BC.NO.46/06/12.05.2012-3 DATED 09.11.2012.
EXHIBIT P19: TRUECOPYOF PRINT OUT OF THE GUIDELINES OF THE INDIAN
BANK ASSOCIATION REGARDING EDUCATIONAL LOAN SCHEME.
EXHIBIT P20: TRUE COPY OF THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA NOTIFICATION
DATED 28.04.2001.
EXHIBIT P21: TRUE COPYOF THE LETTER FROM THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK OF BARODA, ZONAL OFFICE,
CHENNAI IN HIS LETTER NO.CHNZ OPS MK-06/17
DATED 12.06.2017.
EXHIBIT P22: TRUE COPYOF THE LETTER FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK
NO.BOB/KURUPP/OMBUDSMA/127 DATED 05.06.2017
EXHIBIT P23: TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF THE B TECH S2 EXAMINATION
2016-17(S2 RESULT) WITH HIS REGISTER NO.MLM 16CS070 OF
1ST PETITIONER DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P23(A): TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET WITH HIS REGISTER
NO.MLM 16CS07 OF 1ST PETITIONER DATED 22.05.2017.
EXHIBIT P23(B): TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF CHART OF GRADING AS PER
THE RECENT RECOMMENDATION OF THEUGC DATED 28TH
FEBRUARY, 2015.
EXHIBIT P24: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE HONURABLE BANKING
OMBUDSMAN DATED 24.03.2017.
W.P(C).No.26732 of 2017 (N) - 3 -
EXHIBIT P25: TRUE COPYOF THE LETTER FROM THE HONOURABLE BANKING
OMBUDSMAN NO.OBO(T)NO.7211/CTS/002947/2016-17
DATED 28.06.2017.
EXHIBIT P26: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC NO.27948 OF 2013
DATED 07.04.2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS/ANNEXURES:-
-------------------------------------
ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CIRCULAR.
vku/- [ true copy ]
K. Vinod Chandran, J
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.26732 of 2017-N
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of November, 2017
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are concerned with the rejection of an education loan by the 1st respondent-Bank.
2. The 1st petitioner is the son and the 2nd petitioner is the father. The 1st petitioner qualified the Secondary School Examination, as evidenced by Exhibit P1 and the Senior School Certificate Examination, as evidenced by Exhibit P2 from the Central Board of Secondary Education [for brevity "CBSE"]. The petitioner got admitted to the additional 5th respondent-College in the Management Quota. The petitioners applied for a Bank loan through online and the 1st respondent processed the application. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the Bank rejected the application contending that the petitioners were not residing within the area of operation of the 1st respondent.
3. The respondent-Bank refutes the aforesaid contention of the petitioners and refers to the rejection as seen from Exhibit P21. WP(C) No.26732 of 2017 - 2 - Exhibit P21 rejected it for the following reasons:-
"a. The student's academic track record does not satisfy the Bank's guidelines for sanction of education loan.
b. The reputation of the college and employability of the student also did not give comfort to the Bank for considering the loan application favourably".
The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent-Bank is that it is for the Bank to decide as to whether the student can be granted the loan especially since the loan is not sanctioned on a collateral security and it is the competency of the student to qualify in the examinations and the employability of the student which are relevant. The learned Standing Counsel also relies on a Division Bench judgment of this Court, reported in Arya v. Reserve Bank of India [2015 (4) KLT 478].
4. Specific reference is made to the mark-list of the 1st petitioner, which, according to the Bank, does not instill confidence to grant a financial facility of this extent. The Division Bench agreed with the decision of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court reported in A.Kasinathan v. Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Town Hall Road, Madurai (Laws (Mad)(-2012-4-52), in which it was held so in WP(C) No.26732 of 2017 - 3 - paragraphs 10 and 12:
"10. No inherent right to educational loan :- From the Scheme of Article 21A of the Constitution, it is the primary obligation of the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of 6-14 years and in the recent judgment dated 12.4.2012, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of right of children to free and compulsory education under Right to Education Act, 2009 which provides for free and compulsory education to children between age of 6 and 14 years and mandates government/aided/non-minority and unaided schools to reserve 25% of the students for these children. There is no such fundamental right to higher education. Of course, under Article 41, the State, shall within its economic capacity and development, make effective provision for securing the right to education. In terms of Article 21A and Article 41, while there is a right to education, there is no inherent right to educational loans.
xxx xxx xxx
12. As is well known, while lending loan, the main concern of the Bank is safeguarding the amount which was sanctioned and advanced and chance of getting the money back with interest. In order to ensure prompt repayment of the educational loan, Bank is emphasizing the future prospects of the students, employment potential. For getting jobs/ employment in different parts of the country/abroad, one of the criteria is academic performance and there is nothing wrong for the Banks in stipulating 60% marks for the students who secured admission under "Management Quota".
5. The Bank hence has to consider the loan application keeping in mind the possibility of realizing the amounts disbursed with interest. This has a direct bearing on the prospects of the WP(C) No.26732 of 2017 - 4 - student, since the loan can be realized only by repayment after the student gets employment. The student was not admitted on merit and had joined the course in the management quota. This Court does not find any reason to differ from the decision of the Division Bench of this Court; nor are there any grounds to interfere with the decision of the Bank. The writ petition would stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran Judge.
vku/-
[ true copy ]