Abhishek Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11055 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12296 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Abhishek Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Avneesh Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. 

Heard Shri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent.

The scholarship to which the petitioner is entitled has been declined by the impugned order on the footing that the scholarship reimbursement transaction was declined by the bank. According to the bank, the transaction failed due to "account reach maximum credit limit set on account by bank". The transaction limit was set by the bank as at the time when the savings bank account of the petitioner was opened, the petitioner was a minor. The right to rejection is far too sacrosanct to be non-suited on account of a technicality of this nature. Substantively, there is no dispute that the petitioner is entitled to scholarship. The banking rules cannot be used as a ploy to defeat the right of scholarship of the petitioner.

This Court in the case of Aman Pandey vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others in Writ C No. 28049 of 2022 while considering a similar rejection of scholarship held as under:

"It appears from the instructions as well as from the documents annexed with the writ petition that the Saving Bank Account of the petitioner had a transaction limit of Rs.50,000/- and therefore, the transaction transferring Rs.53,850/- in the Savings Bank Account of the petitioner failed. It also transpires that the transaction limit of Rs.50,000/- was maintained because at the time the savings account of the petitioner was started, the petitioner was a minor. It has been argued by the Standing Counsel that under the instructions issued to the institutions and the beneficiaries, it has been specifically stated that any limit fixed in the account should be removed to facilitate transfer of scholarship amount.

Be that as it may, the entitlement of the petitioner for the scholarship amount has not been disputed by the State-respondents. It has been stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the limit imposed on his Saving Bank Account referred above has also been removed.

In light of the aforesaid, the Director, Social Welfare, Lucknow is directed to ensure that the scholarship amount due to the petitioner is transferred in his savings account within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition is allowed."

The case of the petitioner is fully covered by the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai, J. in Aman Pandey (supra).

In this wake the impugned order dated 10.01.2023 passed by respondent no. 3-Director Social Welfare Department, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh is quashed.

The matter is remitted to the Director Social Welfare Department, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh with the following direction:

The scholarship amount due to the petitioner should be transferred to savings sank account of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a fresh representation.

The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

Order Date :- 13.4.2023

Vandit