1 CGHC010277272026 2026:CGHC:32517 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3945 of 2026 1 - Pawan Kumar Marawi S/o Shri Dashrath Lal Marawi Aged About 36 Years R/o Street No. 6, Jawahar Nagar, Tehsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Bank Of India Through Its Chairman, Corporate Centre, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, District Mumbai Maharashtra. 2 - Chief General Manager State Bank Of India, Local Head Office, Bhopal Circle, Hoshangabad Road, District Bhopal M. P. 3 - Chief Manager Retails Assets Small And Medium Enterprises Centre (R E S M A C), State Bank Of India, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Branch Manager State Bank Of India, Akaltara Branch, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioner : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking the following reliefs:- RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.07.30 18:21:46 +0530 2 “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to order or direction quashing and setting aside the decision/communication dated 29.06.2026 (Annexure P/9) issued by the Respondent Bank rejecting the Petitioner's home loan application, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities / Bank to reconsider the Petitioner's application for sanction of home loan strictly in accordance with law within stipulated time, preferably within a period of one week in accordance with law, in the interest of justice. 10.4. That, any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper together with cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed an application dated 29.06.2026 (Annexure P/1) seeking the grant of a home loan. The said application was allegedly rejected, and the petitioner was informed of the rejection through an email. However, the communication neither discloses any reasons for such rejection nor is it accompanied by a detailed or reasoned order rejecting the petitioner's application. 3 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents submits that if the petitioner approaches the Bank by submitting an appropriate application, the same shall be duly considered in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the petitioner's grievance shall also be examined, and he shall be informed of the reasons for the rejection of his earlier application. In the event the petitioner satisfies the requirements under the applicable rules and guidelines, the competent authority shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit an appropriate application, along with all relevant documents, before the concerned Bank within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such application, the concerned Bank shall consider the same, examine the grievance raised by the petitioner, and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law after duly communicating the reasons, if any, for the rejection of the petitioner's earlier application. The entire exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the petitioner's application, in terms of 4 the time frame stipulated under the Reserve Bank – Integrated Ombudsman Scheme (RB-IOS), 2026. 5. With this observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju