M HARIHARASUDHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who had joined the five year B.L Course in Prist University, Thanjavur had applied for a educational loan for a a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) with the 4th respondent herein and since the application was not considered in time, which prompted him to file the present writ petition, seeking for a direction to the 4th respondent to provide educational loan.

(2.) The respondents 3 and 4 had filed a counter affidavit dated 08.04.2018 in which two clarifications have been raised on the petitioner's application namely:-

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 submitted that in view of these clarifications sought for against the petitioner's application, they are unable to pursue any further on the petitioner's request. The educational loan scheme based on the policy decision of the Government of India, came to be introduced with the object of enriching the meritorious student to pursue his or her education with financial support from the banking system under reasonable terms and conditions. The student who seeks educational loan is the principal borrower in all the cases and that the loan availed by such a student is for the sole purpose of utilising it for his educational needs. As such, any reasonable restrictions imposed by the financial institution can only be in conformity with the object of the scheme and any factor which is beyond the scope of the scheme as a bar for availing the loan, could only be deemed to be prima facie illegal.