Kerala High Court
Fathima Marry T R vs Union Of India on 5 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 1246 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
FATHIMA MARRY T R
AGED 69 YEARS
THARIKKARA HOUSE,
MEPPADI, NOW RESIDING AT B-1, PRIYA ARCADE,
MEPPADI ROAD, VINAYAKA, PUTHORRVAYAL P.O,
KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673577
BY ADVS.
R.K.PRASANTH
T.P.PRADEEP
K.RAMACHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS,
ROOM NO. 129-B, NEW DELHI - 110001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 RESERVE BANK OF INDIA,
16TH FLOOR, CENTRAL OFFICE BUILDING ,
SHAHID BHAGAT SINGH ROAD,MUMBAI-400 01,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MAANAGER
3 THE MANAGER,
STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOTTAPPADI BRANCH,
MEPPADI P.O, WAYANAD, PIN-673577.
BY ADVS.
BINDUMOL JOSEPH
PUSHKARAKSHAN V.P
SRIVIDYA K
SRI.S. MANU, ASGI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
:2:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.1246 of 2022
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2022
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
The petitioner, a retired Head Nurse now aged 69
years, is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P3 and to
direct the 3rd respondent-Manager, State Bank of India to
consider her loan application irrespective of Suit filed or
Wilful default or One Time Settlement by the daughter in
relation to her education loan.
2. The petitioner retired as Head Nurse after
rendering 23 years of service and is in receipt of monthly
pension of ₹24,212/-. She has undergone Cardiac Surgery.
Her husband had suffered a stroke. He is unable to walk
without assistance. The petitioner's daughter is a divorcee.
The petitioner and her husband require ₹3 lakhs for their
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
immediate treatment. The petitioner hence submitted an
application for pension loan under the SBI Pension Loan
Scheme.
3. The application was rejected stating that as per
Bank's policy, loan cannot be sanctioned as there is a Suit
pending / Wilful default / Settled account, in her Credit
Report. The petitioner's daughter had availed an educational
loan from Punjab National Bank, of an amount of
₹1,60,720/-, for studying B.Ed Course. The petitioner stood
as a guarantor. The petitioner's daughter did not get
adequate employment after her studies to repay the amount.
There were defaults in the said education loan. Ultimately,
the loan was settled for ₹2 lakhs under a One Time
Settlement Scheme on 27.10.2020.
4. The petitioner states that she was compelled to
stand as a guarantor to her daughter's educational loan,
even though it was not a mandatory requirement. The SBI
Pension Loan Scheme is a beneficial scheme for the Central
and State Government pensioners. The petitioner is holding
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
a savings account for the last more than 40 years with the
Bank. The pension is linked with this account only. The
petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions for grant of
loan. The denial of pension loan to the petitioner during this
pandemic period and that too for the purpose of emergency
medical treatment, is highly illegal, unjustified and arbitrary,
contended the petitioner.
5. The 3rd respondent resisted the writ petition filing a
counter affidavit. Sanctioning or refusal of loan is a
commercial decision taken by the Bank. Loan will be
sanctioned taking into consideration various factors including
creditworthiness and CIBIL Report of the loan applicant. The
CIBIL Report of the petitioner revealed an overdue amount of
₹1,83,906/- in an educational loan sanction/disbursal in the
year 2006. As per Ext.R3(a) Master Circular, loan application
of borrowers whose account status in the CIBIL Report is
settled, should be rejected. As per the Master Circular, the
petitioner will become eligible to apply for pension loan only
after five years from 06.11.2020.
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that
for availing educational loan from the Punjab National Bank,
a personal guarantor was not required since the loan availed
was an educational loan of less than ₹4 lakhs. Therefore, the
petitioner ought not have been made a guarantor in the said
loan. If that be so, settlement of the said educational loan
account under a One Time Settlement Scheme cannot bring
down the credit rating of the petitioner.
7. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted
that what was availed from the Punjab National Bank was an
educational loan. The petitioner's daughter was the borrower.
The petitioner only stood as a guarantor. Ext.R3(a) Master
Circular of the State Bank of India would show that even
when the account has a negative account status in the credit
information report, the condition as to the credit score can be
waived by the Bank. In the facts of the petitioner's case, the
3rd respondent is bound to waive the condition.
8. The petitioner is a cardiac patient. Her husband is
a Cancer patient now on wheelchair. The 3 rd respondent is
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
an instrumentality of the State. The 3 rd respondent has to
consider the exceptional case of the petitioner and grant her
the loan applied for, urged the counsel for the petitioner.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the
judgment of the Apex Court in Ashwani Kumar (Dr.) v.
Union of India and others [(2019) 2 SCC 636] to contend
that the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the court should
take care of enforcement of rights of elderly persons. Relying
on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Regional
Transport Authority v. Shaju [2022 (2) KLT 351], the
learned counsel for the petitioner argued that when the
Master Circular of the Bank gives discretion to the
respondent to waive the condition as to the credit score, the
said discretion should be exercised wherever necessary so
as to render the exercise of discretion, reasonable, fair and
non-arbitrary.
10. The learned Standing Counsel for the 3 rd
respondent, on the other hand, submitted that a writ petition
is not maintainable for getting a loan sanctioned. The
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
pension loan is not a priority sector loan. The banks can
therefore frame their own rules and criteria for consideration
of loan applications. Such rules are framed keeping in mind
prudent business principles and commercial practices. This
Court cannot exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction in order to
compel the Bank to sanction a loan to the petitioner.
11. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Standing Counsel representing the
respondents. I have also heard the Assistant Solicitor
General of India representing the 1 st respondent.
12. The petitioner has applied for pension loan under
a Pension Loan Scheme of the 3 rd respondent. It is not a
priority sector loan. The banks are entitled to frame their own
criteria for sanction of loans. As long as the criteria does not
violate any provisions of the Banking Regulation Act or
Reserve Bank of India Act and the Regulations made by the
Reserve Bank and as long as such criteria does not offend
any of the provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India,
the scope for interference by this Court in exercise of Article
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
226 is limited.
13. Ext.R3(a) Master Circular of the Bank specifically
provides that if the account status for a secured loan /
unsecured loan / Credit Card is (i) Suit filed, (ii) Wilful default,
(iii) Suit filed (Wilful default), (iv) Suit filed & written off, (v)
Wilful default & written-off or (vi) Suit filed (Wilful default) and
written off, the applicant's proposal should be rejected. The
Bank can waive the Class iv applicants who have such
negative account status in their Credit Information Report
more than five years old and have since maintained a
satisfactory credit history without any further default.
14. In the case of the petitioner, the Punjab National
Bank had filed O.S. No.85/2017 in the Munsiff's Court,
Kalpetta for recovery of money in which the petitioner was
the 3rd respondent. Furthermore, when the loan was settled
under the One Time Settlement Scheme, the petitioner was
informed that settlement of the loan under One Time
Settlement Scheme is likely to affect the Credit Score of the
petitioner. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner was aware
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
of the consequences of settling a loan account under OTS
Scheme.
15. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in Ashwani
Kumar (supra) that rights of elderly persons should be
strictly enforced. The issues relating to elders should be
looked at from a humanitarian point of view as well. But, the
said judgment was delivered in the context of claim for
pension and shelter to the elders. The Apex Court delivered
the judgment in Regional Transport Authority (supra) in
the context of Motor Vehicles Act. The said judgments will
not be of any avail to the petitioner.
For the aforesaid reasons, this Court does not find
any legally enforceable right of the petitioner for grant of
loan. The writ petition fails and it is consequently dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/02.04.2022
W.P.(C) No.1246/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1246/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DISTRICT
TREASURY OFFICER, WAYANAD, DATED
01/01/2022.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
PERSONAL LOAN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE SBI
BANK, KOTTAPPADI DATED 25/10/2021
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER
ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
26/10/2021
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFER LETTER (ONE
TIME SETTLEMENT) ISSUED BY PUNJAB
NATIONAL BANK, KALPETTA DATED
27/10/2020.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY
THE PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KALPETTA,
TOWARDS THE PAYMENT IN ONE TIME
SETTLEMENT DATED 06/11/2020.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ON
EDUCATION LOAN SCHEME BEARING NO.
RPCD.PLNFS.BC.NO. 83/06.12.05/2000-01
ISSUED BY RESERVE BANK OF INDIA DATED
28/04/2001.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS PUBLISHED
IN THE WEB SITE OF SBI REGARDING SBI
PENSION LOAN.
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE SAVINGS BANK PASS
BOOK ISSUED BY THE SBI KOTTAPPDI
BRANCH BEARING ACCOUNT NO.
67044560077.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY
THE MUNSIFF COURT, KALPETTA IN O.S
85/2018 DATED 17/01/2018.
RESPONDENT'S EXT:
R3(a) COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF MASTER CIRCULAR-
PENSION LOAN.
