Recent development i Catholic Syrian Bank......

GS/LM/32/2017-19 09.01.19

Mr C VR Rajendran
MD & CEO
The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd
Head Office
Thrissur

Sir,

Notice of Compulsory Retirement from Service (CRS)

It is reported that about 65 Officers of the Bank have been served with a one month notice
of Compulsory Retirement from Service (CRS)
The reason cited for this action is the ‚impairment of efficiency‛ of these Officers due to
advanced age. The letter tersely states that ‚As per the existing policy of the Bank, a note
was placed to the Board in the meeting held on 13.12.2018 to evaluate the performance of
Officers who attained the age of 58 and 59 as on 30.11.2018‛.‚After discussion, the Board
resolved to impose compulsory retirement to those officers who secured ‚less than
satisfactory rating‛
The letter justifies the termination on the basis of the provisions of HO Circulars 220/86 and
372/90.
Let us point out the gross violations in procedure in the light of the provisions contained in
HO Circular No.220/86 and Cir. No.372/1990
An Officer may be compulsorily retired from the service of the Bank only after complying
with the following formalities:

1. In case the Committee feels that a particular Officer is liable to be terminated
compulsorily, as his efficiency has impaired, the officer will be given a chance for
personal representation before the Committee/Board finalises its decision. To our
knowledge, no Officer has been given the opportunity for personal representation,

before the Committee/Board finalised its decision. This is a glaring example of
gross violation in procedure.
2. The Officer will have the right to prefer an appeal before the Board of Directors,
against the decision of the Committee/Board, within 15 days of receipt of the order.
To our knowledge, no officer has been given the opportunity to prefer an appeal
before the Board of Directors, against the aggrieved order of the Committee/Board
specifically constituted to evaluate the performance of Officers who have attained
the age of 58/59. Thus, by the absence of an appeal mechanism, the principle of
natural justice stands violated. Procedurally, an appeal is not preferred at the body
which passed the impugned order.
3. Subject to the above provisions, no Officer shall be compelled to retire from the
service of the Bank before he completes the age of 60 years. It is obvious that the
entire gamut of provisions contained in HO Circular No. 220/86 stands violated in
this letter of termination served to Officers.
Apart from the above violations in procedure, we wish to highlight the damage that this
haphazard decision can bring about in the life of the aggrieved Officers and also on the
reputation and goodwill of the Bank:
1. There is always a possibility of misjudgement or error in the evaluation done by
the appraisers. Several of these affected Officers have an excellent service
record and they have medals, trophies and certificates in proof of their
meritorious past. Experience has shown that the appraisal, being done by
human beings, can be coloured by personal prejudices and bias. In such cases,
the Bank, by this action, would have done immeasurable harm to the Officer who
is being forced out through CRS. The certificate of CRS will be a perennial source
of embarrassment and grief for the Officer and his family.
2. The order of CRS says that the Board took this decision on 13.12.2018 on the
basis of the PAR dated 31.03.2018. It should be borne in mind that the overall
performance of the Bank was deplorable during the year under review. Instead
of the ‘broader shoulder taking the bigger burden’, the finger was uncharitably
pointed at the lower level Officers and they were arbitrarily rated as ‘below
satisfactory’. No meaningful discussion has taken place analysing the causes for
the dismal performance of the Bank or why the Officers failed to perform.
3. This Bank has not terminated the service of any Officer under CRS in the past two
decades other than as a punishment. There are peer Banks operating in the same
turf, who would never contemplate such an insensitive action like this because
they consider their staff to be their biggest assets. This Bank has a history of 98
years and we wholeheartedly believe that this Bank has a bright future too. The
goodwill and social standing of this Bank should not be sullied by sending out
the message that this Banks’ final solution’ for aged Officers is ‘summary
termination’.
4. Officers who are to retire in February, March and April 2019 are also seen
included in the CRS list. We fail to understand the logic behind persecuting such
Officers with this order. It is the ultimate ambition of every self-respecting
Officer to retire honourably after putting in more than three decades of service.
We earnestly hope that you would reconsider this decision on CRS on the basis of the above
reasoning. In case you still prefer to go ahead with this decision, we will be forced to find
out all possible alternatives including litigation as we feel that great injustice has been
done.
We wish to draw your attention to the following quote from the Book ‚Fair and Friendly-
The first 25 years of Fairfax‛. The preface of this publication ends with the following note
from the founder of Fairfax-‚What profiteth a man if he gains the whole world but loses
his soul?‛
It is our fervent hope that the soul of CSB remains intact.

Yours faithfully,

Ramasubrahmanian T N
General Secretary
Copy To,
Honourable Board of Directors