IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17431 of 2009 1. NARAYAN KUMAR S/O SRI PREM CHAND PRASAD, R/O GAJ BHARASARA, P.S- DINARA, DISTT- ROHTAS Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, NATWAR BRANCH, DINARA, DISTT- ROHTAS 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, NATWAR BRANCH DINARA, DISTT- ROHTAS 3. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, AT PATNA 4. THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR AT PATNA 5. THE WELFARE OFFICER, DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISTT- ROHTAS, SASARAM, BIHAR ----------- 02. 09.02.2010 Petitioner is a student who has got admission in the Institute of Hotel Management, Catering Technology and Applied Nutrition(Ministry of Tourism, Government of India) at Gwalior for a three years Graduation course. Petitioner belongs to the scheduled cast. His father is a teacher in Primary School and even though he managed to get admission as aforesaid, he is unable to pay for his education. In the writ petition, it is alleged that his native place being Natwar in the District of Rohtas where his father is also a Primary School Teacher, he approached the State Bank of India, Natwar Branch for grant of educational loan. It is in that very branch his father’s salary is remitted by the State Government. Petitioner’s further case is that in spite of moving from pillar to post there is no say at that Branch how to accept his application form nor is he being told as to what he to do in this regards. The result is that he may be expelled from the Institution for having failed to pay the fee and other 2 charges. Learned counsel for the State Bank of India who normally appears for the Bank having been called upon by the Court to assist in the matter states that petitioner has been approaching a wrong Branch. The grant of educational loan is now centralized. He is to apply for educational loan at the Local Head Office of the State Bank of India at Patna in RACPC Section. It is regrettable that such a small information could not be given by the Officers at the Natwar Branch for which petitioner had to spent time and money to come to this Court. The conduct of the State Bank of India is reprehensible in view of the disclosure as made today by the learned counsel for the State Bank of India which information could have been supplied to the petitioner at Natwar Branch itself. Let petitioner approach the Local Head Office of the State Bank of India who would not only entertain the application of the petitioner but would also assist the petitioner in all manners with regard to filling up the form and completing all other formalities expeditiously. Let it be noted that petitioner is a mere student and not a businessman concerning with business dealings. It is with that consensus Bank should approach with the matter and not make it difficult for deserving students like the petitioner in taking the financial assistance especially when they belong to Schedule 3 Case. The petitioner so moved, it is expected that the respondent Bank which is apart from being a Bank is a State instrumentality, would work expeditiously and ensure that if petitioner is entitled for the education loan the same is sanctioned and disbursed at the earliest in accordance with law. The writ application with the aforesaid observations stands disposed off. Shageer (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)