Aleena Sreejith vs Union Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 9873 Ker

Kerala High Court

Aleena Sreejith vs Union Of India on 5 April, 2024

Author: P Gopinath

Bench: P Gopinath

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                         WP(C) NO. 1895 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:

    1       ALEENA SREEJITH, AGED 18 YEARS
            MULLUVELIL THEKETHIL, MELEPPADOM P.O, MANNAR,
            ALPPUZHA., PIN - 689627
    2       GEETHA SREEJITH, w/o. SREEJITH
            MULLUVELIL THEKETHIL, MELEPPADOM P.O,
             MANNAR, ALPPUZHA., PIN - 689627
            BY ADVS.
            ASHIK K.MOHAMED ALI
            MUHAMMED RIFA P.M.
            NIZAMUDHEEN P.
            RAMSEENA N.


RESPONDENT/S:

    1       UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
             MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SHASTRI BHAVAN,
            DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001
    2       RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
            MAIN BUILDING, SHAHID BHAGAT SINGH ROAD, MUMBAI,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS GOVERNOR, PIN - 400001
    3       NATIONAL CREDIT GUARANTEE TRUSTEE COMPANY LTD.
            BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST MUMBAI,
            MAHARASHTRA, PIN - 400051
            REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
    4       STATE BANK OF INDIA ,
            MELEPPADOM BRANCH (CODE NO. 01442),
             MANALEL TOWERS, MELEPPADOM, ALAPPUZHA,PIN - 689627
            REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
    5       THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
            ZONAL OFFICE, GOMDATH SHOPPING COMPLEX,
            OPP. PRIVTE BUS STAND,
            MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA., PIN - 690101
    6       ADDL.R6. TAAN UNION CIBIL LIMITED,
            ONE INDIA BULL CENTRE, TOWER 2A, 9TH FLOOR,
            SENAPATHY BAPAT MARG, ELPHINSTONE ROAD, MUMBAI- 400013,
            REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
            (IS IMPLEADED AS PER ODER DATED 17-01-2024 IN IA 1/23
            IN WPC)
 WP(C) NO. 1895 OF 2023            2



    7     ADDL.R7. POONAWALLA FINCORP LTD.,
          1ST FLOOR, CLOCK TOWER, KOMMADY BYPASS ROAD,
          ALAPPUZHA NORTH, ALAPPUZHA-688007,
          REPRESENTED BY MANAGER.
          (IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17-01-2024 IN IA 3/23
          IN WP(C) 1895/2023)
          BY ADVS.
          JAWAHAR JOSE
          No Advocate
          P.R.AJITH KUMAR
          C.AJITH KUMAR


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 1895 OF 2023                 3



                                JUDGMENT

The 1st petitioner applied for an education loan for an

amount of Rs.4,00,000/- under the Credit Guarantee Fund

scheme for Educational Loans issued by the Ministry of Human

Resource Development (Department of Higher Education). The

2nd petitioner is the mother of the 1 st petitioner. According to

the petitioners, the provisions of the Credit Guarantee Fund

Scheme for educational loans, which is on record as Ext.P8 will

indicate that a loan upto Rs.7,50,000/- can be sanctioned

without any collateral security and third party guarantee. It is

submitted that, when the Scheme provides so, it is not proper on

the part of the respondent bank to have insisted upon the

guarantee of the 2nd petitioner. It is submitted that the

application filed by the 1st petitioner for the loan has now been

rejected by Ext.P13 on the ground that the 2 nd petitioner did not

have a satisfactory CIBIL score so as to sanction the loan in

favour of the 1st petitioner. In other words, it is the case of the

petitioners that the loan is covered by the terms of Ext.P8

Scheme and it is not open to the respondent bank to reject the

application on the ground that the CIBIL score of the 2 nd

petitioner was not satisfactory.

2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondent bank would submit that, apart from the issue of

unsatisfactory CIBIL score of the 2 nd petitioner, there was yet

another aspect which has to be considered. It is submitted that,

the term 'eligible borrower' in Ext.P8 Scheme means a borrower

of Indian nationality, who meets the eligibility criteria under the

'IBA Model Educational Loan Scheme for pursuing Higher

Education in India and abroad'. It is submitted that Ext.P8 itself

indicates that parents/guardians will be the co-borrowers/joint

borrowers and therefore, the contention of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners that the CIBIL score of the 2 nd

petitioner could not have been the basis for rejecting the loan

application, cannot be accepted. It is submitted that the IBA

Model Code (which is on record as Ext.P14) indicates that the 1 st

petitioner ought to have obtained admission on the basis of

merit. It is pointed out, with reference to paragraph No.14 of

the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.4 and 5

that, enquiries have revealed that the 1 st petitioner had not

obtained admission on merit and there were also some doubt

regarding the genuineity of Exts.P1 and P5 documents produced

by the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, in

reply, would submit that the contention taken by the learned

counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 cannot be

accepted. It is submitted that when the repayment of the loan is

guaranteed under Ext.P8 scheme and is to be given without any

collateral security, it does not stand to reason for respondent

Nos.4 and 5 to contend that the loan application can be rejected

on the basis of the CIBIL score of the 2 nd petitioner merely on

account of the fact that the 2nd petitioner was also a guarantor in

respect of the loan. It is also pointed out that the loan has to be

granted having regard to the repaying capacity of the 1 st

petitioner, after obtaining the necessary qualification and not on

the basis of the CIBIL score of the 2 nd petitioner. It is submitted

that , Ext.P13 does not indicate any other reason for rejecting

the application for loan except the fact that the CIBIL Score of

the 2nd petitioner was not satisfactory.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent

Nos.4 and 5 and the learned counsel appearing for the

additional 6th respondent (CIBIL), I am of the view that the loan

application filed by the petitioner must be reconsidered by

respondent Nos. 4 and 5, having specific regard to the terms of

Ext.P8 Scheme and Ext.P14 Scheme framed by the Indian

Banks' Association. The contention of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners that the loan is guaranteed under

Ext.P8 Scheme and is to be given without any collateral security

and therefore, the CIBIL score of the 2 nd petitioner may not be a

criteria to reject the application for loan appears to be prima

facie attractive. The intent and purpose of Ext.P8 Scheme

appears to be to ensure that meritorious students are not denied

the chance of education on account of lack of funds. Secondly,

as pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners, the facts set out in Ext.P14 of the counter affidavit

filed by respondent Nos.4 and 5 do not appear to be a reason to

reject the loan application filed by the petitioner. The only

reason stated in Ext.P13 is that the CIBIL score of the 2 nd

petitioner is not satisfactory.

Therefore, this writ petition will stand disposed of,

directing the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India ,

RASMECC, Mavelikara to consider afresh the issue of granting

loan to the 1st petitioner on the basis of Ext.P7 application,

having regard to the terms of Ext.P8 Scheme and Ext.P14 Model

Educational Loan Scheme prepared by the Indian Banks'

Association and also having regard to the observations in this

judgment. It will be open to the respondents to call upon the

petitioner to produce necessary certificates to show that her

admission was on the basis of merit.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P. JUDGE ajt

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1895/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ADMISSION OFFER LETTER DATED 26-09-2022 ISSUED BY THE GRT COLLEGE OF NURSING, TIRUTTANI Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGISTRAR OF THE TAMIL NADU DR. M.G.R MEDICAL UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI SHOWING THE AFFILIATION OF GRT COLLEGE OF NURSING, TIRUTTANI Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE TAMIL NADU NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL IN RESPECT OF GRT COLLEGE OF NURSING, TIRUTTANI Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE SHOWING RENEWAL OF SUITABILITY FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2022-

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE SHOWING THE FEE STRUCTURE Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FEE STRUCTURE ISSUED BY THE GRT COLLEGE OF NURSING, MAHALAKSHMI NAGAR, TIRUTTANI Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN EDUCATION LOAN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND SCHEME FOR EDUCATIONAL LOANS ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT (DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION) Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03-12-2019 IN WP (C) NO. 19248 OF 2019 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03-07-2020 IN WP (C) NO. 10968 OF 2020 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15-01-2021 IN WP (C) NO. 25336 OF 2020 Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING A POST BY THE PRESS INFORMATION BUREAU REGARDING EDUCATION LOANS Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 05-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BANK TO THE 1ST PETITIONER Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE MODEL EDUCATIONAL LOAN SCHEME FOR PURSUING HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA AND ABROAD 2015 (AMENDED 2016)

Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE IBA MODEL EDUCATIONAL LOAN SCHEME FOR PURSUING HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA AND ABROAD 2015 Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14-07-2022 ISSUED BY M/S POONAWALLA FINCORP COMPANY. RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit-R(4)(a) The true copy of circular dated 27-6-2014 issued by Reserve Bank of India were directed to frame policies, to incorporate credit appraisal process, by obtaining Credit Information Reports from one or more Credit Information Companies, while lending retail/consumer loans.

Exhibit-R(4)(b) True copy of the circular dated 18-4-2007 which was issued by the Reserve Bank of India.

Exhibit-R(4)(c) True copy of relevant pages of revised circular dated 20-3-2021.

Exhibit-R(4)(d) True copy of circular dated 17-1-2018 issued by the bank, prescribing the manner in which the Credit Information Reports have to be dealt.

Exhibit-R(4)(e) True copy of the circular dated 4-9-2020 issued by the Reserve Bank of India.

Exhibit-R(4)(f) True copies of the downloaded documents from the website dated 30-1-2023.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit-R6(a) True copy of the E-mail dated 13/12/2023 received by 6th respondent from 7th respondent