IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13450 of 2008 Between: Shilam Srinivas yadav S/o Lingaiah R/o 5-1-97, Market Road, Vemulawada Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Chief Manager, Andhra Bank, Zonal Office, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 Senior Manager, Andhra Bank, Vemulawada, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue appropriate Writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, in not releasing educational loan amount which was sanctioned vide letter No. 678/53/28/623/716/169 dated 03- 01-2006 as illegal, arbitrary and against principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to release the educational loan amount of Rs.11,30,000/- to the A/c. No. 000017645272 in Andhra Bank Vemulawada Branch and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.GIRI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: DR.K.LAKSHMI NARASIMHA The Court made the following: O R D E R: This Writ Petition is ﬁled by the petitioner-Shilam Srinivas Yadav with a prayer to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the education amount which was sanctioned vide letter No.678/53/28/623/716/169, dated 3.1.2008 as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner is the father of Silam Mahesh Yadav who studied B.E. and secured a seat in M.S. in Oklahama City University in U.S.A. in January, 2006. The petitioner’s son applied for sanction of education loan of Rs.14.25 lakhs. The petitioner stood as a guarantor for the education loan sanctioned to his son. He also deposited title deeds of his immovable property as security for the education loan availed by his son. The respondents credited an amount of Rs.2,95,000/- in the account of the son of the petitioner. Since rest of the amount is not released, the petitioner approached this court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondents ﬁled counter aﬃdavit. It is stated in the counter aﬃdavit that son of the petitioner violated the conditions of the loan sanction proceedings and therefore the son of the petitioner is not entitled for release of the rest of the loan amount. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Bank. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not literate and he was not aware of the terms and conditions of the loan sanction proceedings and therefore the action of the respondents in not releasing rest of the loan amount to the son of the petitioner is unjust. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents-Bank submits that as per the terms and conditions of the loan sanction proceedings, the son of the petitioner has to inform the Bank, in case of change of course or place of study, or educational institution. I have gone through the loan sanction proceedings which ﬁnd place from pages 8 to 11 of the material papers. As per the terms and conditions of the loan sanction proceedings, the borrower should not, without the Bank’s written prior permission, change the course of studies or the place of study or the educational institution. Indisputably the son of the petitioner (borrower) changed the University without intimation to the respondents-bank. In that view of the mater, the respondents-Bank is justiﬁed in not releasing the rest of the loan to the son of the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 24th September, 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.13450 OF 2008 24T H SEPTEMBER, 2008.