IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 RP.No. 212 of 2011(H) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.1072/2011 Dated 08/02/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS IN W.P:- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHINY.P.K., W/O.(LATE) E.V.PRADEEP, EALLATHUMKATTIL, CHINGAVANAM.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 531. 2. VAISHNAVI PRADEEP, EALLATHUMKATTIL, CHINGAVANAM.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 531. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.ALEX.M.SCARIA SRI.SAJU JOSE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN W.P:- ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM-682 002. 3. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL NODAL OFFICER, ERANAKULAM-682 031. 4. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KODIMATHA BRANCH, KOTTAYAM-682 002. ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R4 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.MANU FOR R1& R2 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.212 of 2011 IN W.P.(C) NO. 1072 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 24th day of March, 2011 O R D E R The review petition has been filed by the writ petitioners seeking review of the order dated 8/02/2011. 2. The writ petition was filed praying for a direction to the respondent Bank to release education loan as applied for by the petitioners. This Court passed an interim order dated 27/1/11 directing that on the petitioners complying with the procedural formalities, the Bank will disburse the sanctioned amount of `2.5 lakhs. It is this order which was subsequently vacated by order dated 8/2/2011 and the reason stated was that it was on account of the refusal of the petitioners to complete the documentation that the Bank was unable to disburse the amount as directed. 3. Although various contentions have been raised by the petitioners justifying their prayer seeking review of the order dated 8.2.2011 and the Bank has also justified their stand by filing counter affidavit, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the Bank has taken a very fair stand and submitted that, as a R.P.No.212/11 IN WPC No. 1072/11 :2 : special case, without insisting on the petitioners making payment of the margin money amount mentioned in Annexure R4(a), the Bank is willing to disburse `2,50,000/- to the petitioners. This is subject to the petitioners executing the required loan agreement, which requirement cannot be objected. In that view of the matter, the review petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) That on the petitioners executing the loan agreement as required by the Bank, the Bank will without insisting on the petitioners remitting the margin money amount, disburse the prorata instalments of the fee to the college of the 2nd petitioner without any further delay in the matter. (2) However, the execution of the agreement and the disbursal of the loan as above shall be without prejudice to the contentions of both parties. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp