JUDGMENT :- 1. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent State Bank of India to sanction educational loan to the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner R.Sarathkumar, minor represented by his natural guardian M.Ramachandran after completing 10th standard has applied for air training in Franklinn Institute which is said to have been recognized by the Civil Aviation Ministry. The said course is one year for aviation training. The only grievance advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that when other banking institutions like UCO Bank, Central Bank of India, Union Bank and Indian Overseas Bank have granted loan facilities to the students undergoing training, the respondent bank cannot deny the benefit of educational loan facility to the petitioner on the ground that the institute in which the petitioner is undergoing training has not been recognized by the AICTE or UGC or any other competent authority. 3. (i)In reply, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submitted that the State Bank of India by Circular No.PB/PL/36 dated September 7, 2006 has clarified that the Pilot Training Programme and Air hostess Training cannot be considered as education as they are only training programmes and therefore, the proposals for loan cannot be considered under education loan. However, such a request may be considered as personal loan with adequate collateral security. (ii)The learned counsel for the respondent bank by bringing to the notice of this Court another Circular No.PB/CITU/4A/24 dated 25.07.2007 issued by the State Bank of India further submitted that the proposal given to Pilot/Air hostess training courses mentioned in para (3) (iii) of the aforesaid circular may be considered under the Career Loan Scheme. 4. Therefore, it is not the case of the respondents that the request of the petitioner was rejected altogether by not granting any loan facility. But only in view of the fact that the respondent was not able to get proper response from the institute in which the petitioner is undergoing Air training, whether it was approved by the AICTE or UGC, the respondent bank has come forward to consider the request under Career Loan Scheme. Therefore, this court is of the view that the petitioner is undergoing only Air training which is not coming under education, but is only coming under training. Therefore, this court is of the view that the petitioner is undergoing only Air training which is not coming under education, but is only coming under training. Therefore, the petitioner cannot ask for educational loan but he can move appropriate application seeking loan under Career Loan Scheme from the respondent bank. If the petitioner is able to produce the certificate from the AICTE or UGC to show that the institute is approved, in that event, the respondent bank shall consider the petitioner’s request under education. 5. With this observation, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.