IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03.02.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA Writ Petition No.29484 of 2010 M.Mahalaxmi ... Petitioner Vs. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, New Washermenpet branch, Chennai 600 081. ... Respondent Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Bank to disburse the educational loan to the petitioner by considering the fees structure of the institution. For petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasa Narayanan For respondent : Mr.P.D.Audi Kesavalu O R D E R The petitioner by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the order passed by the Bank declining request of the petitioner for grant of educational loan on the ground that that the co-applicant of the petitioner, i.e., petitioner's father is a defaulter. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.17507 and 17508 of 2010 decided on 28.10.2010 in the case of G.Dhivya & G.Preethi Vs. The Branch Manager, Canara Bank and another, to contend that mere fact, that the father of the applicant has taken loan, cannot be a ground to deny educational loan to the petitioner, as the loan availed by the father of the petitioner is for different purpose, which cannot be correlated to educational loan. 3. The learned counsel for the Bank on the other hand placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.21445 of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2010 decided on 09.11.2010 in the case of G.Sharanya and another Vs. State Bank of India, Adyar, Chennai 20 wherein this Court held that if co-applicant i.e. father of student is defaulter, then educational loan cannot be sanctioned. 4. In view of conflicting judgment, the writ in normal circumstances should have been referred to larger Bench, but at the time of hearing of the case, the learned counsel for the Bank made an offer to the petitioner, that her application for educational loan would be sympathetically considered, if the petitioner joins her mother as co-applicant instead of her father who is defaulter of loan. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner accepted the offer made by the learned counsel for the Bank. 6. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the Bank at the time of hearing and acceptance by the petitioner's counsel, the writ petition is disposed off, with liberty to petitioner move fresh application for grant of educational loan, by joining her mother as co-applicant. In case such application is filed, same be disposed of within four weeks of receipt favourable. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar. vaan To The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, New Washermenpet branch, Chennai 600 081. 1 cc to Mr.S. Srinivas Narayanan, Advocate, Sr. 8419 1 cc to Mr.P.D. Audivkesavalu, Advocate, S. 8540 W. P. No.29484 of 2010 NG (CO) kk 15/2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/