Fri. Mar 29th, 2024
Supreme Court of IndiaThe Hindu

Synopsis: The Court noted that the issue falls within the scope of the private contract between the bank and the employee.

The Supreme Court today, declined to interfere with the dismissal by the Bombay High Court of a plea filed against the termination of the former ICICI Bank Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director Chanda Kochhar in 2019.

While Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi fervently urged the Court to hear the case, the Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy, indicated that they were not inclined to participate in the order questioned. This comes within the domain of private contract between the bank and the worker. Furthermore the judges said they were sorry, but the court could not intervene in this matter.

Chanda Kochhar
Business Standard

Rohatgi, appearing for Kochhar, argued that it was not available to ICICI Bank to practically recall the retirement of the former CEO and MD. The move to terminate Kochhar was challenged on the ground that the decision was taken without the prior consent of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

He argued that her resignation had been turned into termination. Whether the termination can be made without the resignation being accepted, is a concern of her case.

When Justice Kaul pointed out that the RBI had approved the termination of Kochhar, Rohatgi countered that the employee was not protected by 35B of the Banking Regulation Act.

The Court eventually refused to hear the case despite Rohtagi’s plea to post the matter for next week.

Chanda Kochhar had approached the Bombay High Court in January last year to challenge the ‘termination for cause’ stated to her by ICICI Bank.

A committee headed by former Supreme Court Judge BN Srikrishna was named to investigate allegations that ICICI Bank provided loans to Videocon Industries and in quid pro quo, Videocon invested in Deepak Kochhar’s Nupower Renewables, i.e. the husband of Chanda Kochhar.

Last year, Chanda Kochhar was subsequently indicted by the Justice Srikrishna Committee. In turn, after considering the inquiry report, the Board of Directors of ICICI Bank terminated her employment. As a result, the Board told Kochhar on January 30, 2019 that it wanted to treat her separation from the bank as ‘termination for cause’.

Later, the bank withdrew the retirement benefits for Kochhar. Her attempts to secure current and potential entitlements have been denied, including unpaid numbers, stock options and medical benefits.

Kochhar then approached the Bombay High Court questioning the denial of her remuneration by ICICI as Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, as well as the termination order by ICICI.

In March of this year, Kochhar’s petition was dismissed by the High Court, noting that ICICI Bank was a private entity and that Kochhar’s terms of service were not governed by any statute.