The recommendation is part of a detailed blueprint for sweeping reforms in public sector banks, prepared by the central bank. The recommendations are being discussed with the finance ministry and will be taken up with the next government on a priority basis.
Stressing the importance of granting complete autonomy in the day-to-day operations of public sector banks so that these could effectively compete with their private sector peers, RBI said such autonomy was contingent upon the government reducing its stake, especially at a time when the Centre was resorting to borrowing for capital infusion in these banks.
| REFORM AREAS |
|
Under the Banking Regulation Act, the government has to hold at least 51 per cent stake in public sector banks. However, in several cases, the stake is as much as 80 per cent.
RBI has also suggested the government and the regulator don’t involve themselves in the process of appointing the senior management at these banks, and also withdraw from the boards of public sector banks. It feels the posts of chairmen and managing directors should be split, as a chairman and managing director has absolute power and often dominates the board.
It also says the chief executive should have a fixed term of five years. The regulator has suggested a host of reforms for various issues — from accountability in loan sanctioning to human resource management and board accountability. It has said lateral movement of staff at public sector banks should start at an early stage — at the level of deputy general manager and general manager. This would ensure a candidate was made aware of the bank he or she might head in the future, it said, adding lateral movement should also be considered for State Bank of India (SBI).
It said the SBI group was more vulnerable in that the bank’s senior management was selected internally, which inhibited new thinking.
The RBI paper also raised the issue of auditors’ accountability, saying chartered accountant director should not be part of the management committee of the board that took decisions on loan sanctioning, as this led to conflict of interest.
The existing committee method of sanctioning loans should be done away with, as this didn’t hold any single individual accountable, the central bank said.
In case of frauds, banks’ boards and senior managements should be held accountable and a branch-level official should not be made scapegoat, it added.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)