Manimaran G V
There is a news item that appeared in Times Of India under the title “ A blow to CBI – 5 Canara Bank Ex staff – Discharged “
By carefully analysing the news item, we can draw inference as follows, which could be taken as a lesson also by the staff of the bank.
Observation 1:
The bank had refused to give sanction for prosecution of four other bank officers who are still in service . The bank had concluded that there was no offence made out as alleged by the prosecution in the charge sheet.
Inference :
We have to appreciate the stand of the bank who came forward to protect their officers as the bank opined that there was no reason to doubt their officers, and when they concluded that no offence made out as alleged by the prosecution, the bank stood strong against the pressure perhaps mounted by the agency like CBI.
Whereas the CBI proceeded against the Ex officers of the bank though the bank ‘s stand was applicable to the retired officers also, but, since there was no provision for seeking the permission from the bank to proceed against the ex officers of the bank, CBI dragged them to the court and the retired officers had to suffer with humiliation in the process of court enquiry.
Suggestions :
Thus, there is a need for an amendment in the service regulations and the government guidelines that the stand of the bank in such cases shall be extended to the retired officers also which would bring a relief to the officers and wasting court’s time. Otherwise the officers who are at the verge of retirement, whatever position they posses in the bank, may have hesitation in taking decisions more particularly in credit dispensation.
Observation 2 :
The special judge observed that it was very much clear from the facts that final decisions on the loan dispersal were taken by the higher ups who had been unfortunately not prosecuted and he further stated that the accused employees have only processed the loan proposals but the final decision was taken by Management Committee members and the Board of Directors of the Canara Bank.
Inference :
Every bank should have a structured accountability policy which must define in clear terms the role and responsibility of various strata involved in credit decisions.
Normally the steps involved in Credit dispensation are
- identification by marketing personnel
- Processing and recommendation by the officers at lower level who would perhaps personally verify the genuineness of the documents and the veracity of the financial statements .
- Recommendation by the next higher level which would be based on the notes with supporting documents placed by the processing officers.
- Sanctioning authority will be taking a final call, in most of the cases sitting in remote, based on the papers and documents presented to them.
- There could be a reviewing authority too, to review the process involved whether the sanction matches to the principles and policies of the bank.
In the presence of such discreet accountability policy, the investigating agencies, internal or external will be able to identify the lapses at various levels and accordingly they can arrive at conclusion in case of failure of the loan.
But, in a structured system of Credit dispensation, the sanctioning authorities cannot deny or defy their role in the process of sanction and shift the responsibility to the personnel down the line.
Observation 3 :
There is not even any prima facie material which is brought to the notice to show that the applicants have done any overt act and omission on their part to facilitate acts of other accused nor any materials to come to prima facie conclusion that they were part of any conspiracy as alleged by the prosecution CBI. The court also said that the offences relating to corruption were also not made out against them.
Inference :
It is indeed a big surprise that despite the bank also took similar observations of the court in the initial stage and conveyed to CBI and firmly denied to give permission to prosecute the servicing officers , how the CBI proceeded against the innocent retired senior citizens.
This situation strengthens our argument of giving the same amount of safety and immunity to be provided to the retired employees of the bank also as in the case of serving officers.
And the system may also study the reasons for such action by the premier investigating agency of the country and initiate steps so as not to recur such actions in future.
LESSON :
Everyone in the bank should discreetly follow the systems and procedures of the bank to achieve the objectives, principles and policies of the institution than trying to please the individuals while discharging one’s responsibilities.
Since it is proved that all the unfortunate victims who are now freed, had only followed the institution’s directions and they were not the reasons for the failure of the advance, they must be suitably compensated for their financial drain and their mental strain.