IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 6797 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JOSMY JOSEPH, D/O.JOSY VARGHESE, AGED 20 YEARS, KAVIPURAVEDATHIL HOUSE, CHITTADY P.O., CHITTADY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.RAFFEEKH KOTTAKKAL.K MR.O.C.LAIJU RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS (BANKING DIVISION) NORTH BLOCK, JANPATH BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE CATHELIC SYRIAN BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, CHITTADY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE BUILDING, SHAHID BHAGAT SING ROAD, MUMBAI-400 001. ADVS. MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI FOR R1 MR.C.A.JOY FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 6797 of 2010 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF ADMISSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY NURSING COLLEGE. EXT.P2: COPY OF GUIDELINES ISSUED TO THE SCHEDULED BANKS BY THE RBI. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A): COPY OF COMMUNICATION DTD 21.1.10 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.6797 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of MAY, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed this writ petition on an allegation that the petitioner's application for an educational loan is not being considered and he is not being supplied with an application form for applying for loan. At the time of admission, he has also obtained a direction to the second respondent to issue an application form for educational loan on production of a copy of the order. 2. Now the second respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that in fact the petitioner had submitted an application for educational loan which was duly considered by the bank and Ext.R2(A) order has been communicated to the petitioner stating that since the academic performance of the applicant is below minimum level stipulated by the bank for educational loans, his application is rejected. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not present. W.P.(c)No.6797/10 2 From Ext.R2(A) I find that the petitioner herself has signed the same in acknowledgment of the communication. That being so, the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. She has suppressed material facts from this Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Although I was inclined to grant costs, exercising restraint, I refrain from doing so. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.6797/10 3