EXPECTED DA FOR BANK EMPLOYEE FROM MAY 2026

Expected DA Calculation Updated on 30.03.26 on the basis of CPI for the month of Feb'26 with the assumptions of Mar'26. The CPI for the month of Feb'26 announced on 30.03.26 as 148.5 with a decrease of 0.10 points from Jan'26. (as per revised base year 2016) (The base year was changed from Oct 2020)

1. Keeping in view of recent CPI announced , we may assume there would be an increase in CPI index by 0.90 points in the next month. Accordingly, on this assumption, we may expect there would be an increase of 0.80% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.8% DA will become payable from May'26.
2. On assumptions if there is an increase in CPI index by 0.60 points in the next month, we may expect there would be be an increase of 0.70% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.70 percentage of DA will become payable from May'26.
3. On assumptions if there is an increase in CPI index by 0.50 points in the next both month, we may expect there would be be an increase of 0.67% DA in terms of 12^th BPS on revised pay. Total 25.67 percentage of DA will become payable from May'26.

CBI Arrests SBI Assistant Manager in Rs.16,000 Bribery Case in Assam

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested an Assistant Manager of State Bank of India (SBI) in a bribery case in Assam. The bank officer was caught while allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹16,000 from a complainant.

According to the CBI, the accused officer was working as an Assistant Manager and Loan Officer at SBI’s Gumi Branch in Kamrup (Rural) district of Assam

Bank employees can face arrest if they are involved in corruption, fraud, forgery, or misuse of their official position. Various laws in India allow investigative agencies to take action against such offences.

 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

Bank officials who demand or accept bribes, misuse their position, or obtain illegal benefits can be booked under the Prevention of Corruption Act. This law is commonly used in cases investigated by the CBI.

IPC Section 420 – Cheating

This section applies when a bank employee dishonestly cheats a customer, bank, or financial institution to gain money or benefits.

 IPC Section 409 – Criminal Breach of Trust

If a bank officer misuses or illegally transfers funds entrusted to them, they can be charged under this section for breach of trust.

 IPC Section 468 – Forgery for Cheating

This section is used when fake documents, forged signatures, or fabricated records are used to approve loans or financial transactions.

 IPC Section 471 – Using Forged Documents

If a bank staff member knowingly uses forged documents as genuine, they can face action under this section.

Case Registered After Complaint

The CBI registered the case on 12 March 2026 after receiving a complaint against the bank officer. The complainant alleged that the officer had demanded a bribe of ₹16,000 in return for processing loan applications.

These loan applications were related to customers seeking loans for the installation of rooftop solar electrification systems.

CBI Trap and Arrest

After verifying the complaint, the CBI set up a trap operation. During the operation, the accused officer was caught red-handed while demanding and accepting the bribe amount of ₹16,000 from the complainant

Delhi Court Convicts MP Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti in Bank Fraud and Forgery Case

A Delhi court on Wednesday convicted Madhya Pradesh Congress MLA Rajendra Bharti in a corruption case. The case involves forgery of bank records and cheating a cooperative bank through a fixed deposit scheme.

Rajendra Bharti is a three-time MLA from the Datia constituency in Madhya Pradesh. He is also a senior leader of the Indian National Congress. He was facing trial in this cheating case.

The court said that Bharti was part of a criminal conspiracy. This conspiracy allowed illegal withdrawal of interest from the bank for more than 10 years.

Justice Dig Vinay Singh, Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act at Rouse Avenue Courts, said that the evidence clearly shows Bharti’s role. The judge noted that Bharti was linked to both the beneficiary trust and the bank.

The court said that Bharti was a trustee of the beneficiary trust. At the same time, he was also the chairperson of the bank when the fraud happened. Because of this, the court concluded that he was part of the conspiracy.

The case was earlier being heard in Madhya Pradesh. Later, it was transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court after Bharti requested it.

The case is related to a fixed deposit of ₹10 lakh made in 1998. The deposit was made in Zila Sahkari Krishi Gramin Vikas Bank in the name of a trust called Shri Shyam Sunder Shyam Jan Sahyog Evam Samajik Vikas Sansthan.

The prosecution said that the deposit was originally for three years. However, bank records were later changed to show that it was extended to 10 years and then to 15 years.

SBI Allahabad Manager sent to 5 years Jail in Fake Home Loan Scam Case

A CBI court in Lucknow has sentenced two people, including a former branch manager of State Bank of India (SBI), to five years in prison in a bank fraud case. The court has also imposed a total fine of ₹13 lakh.

The convicted persons are Ashok Kumar Dixit, former Branch Manager of SBI, Colonelganj Branch in Allahabad, and Govind Ram Tiwari, proprietor of M/s G.R. Associates, Allahabad.

According to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the case was registered on May 31, 2005, based on source information against Ashok Kumar Dixit.

The investigation revealed that during 2003–2004, Dixit entered into a criminal conspiracy with Govind Ram Tiwari. They worked together to fraudulently sanction and disburse 36 housing loans

These loans were given using fake and false documents provided by Tiwari. The total loan amount was ₹1,69,45,000.

Due to this fraud, the bank suffered a loss of ₹1,81,85,500. The accused also gained wrongful benefits from the scam.

After completing the investigation, the CBI filed a charge sheet on August 8, 2007, against the accused persons.

After the trial, the court found both accused guilty and sentenced them to five years of imprisonment along with a total fine of ₹13 lakh.

Why MP Govt banned Bank of Baroda? Read what Bank said

 Bank of Baroda has issued an official clarification regarding a news report about the ban imposed by the Madhya Pradesh Government on the Bank.

The bank shared that the issue started on March 26, 2026, when one of its branches received an email requesting the transfer of funds from a savings account of the MP Government to another government account. However, there was a mismatch between the requested amount and the available balance in the account.

Later the same day, the branch received another email with a revised amount, but this request did not include any official letter.

On March 27, 2026, the branch received another email along with an official letter from the State Government department asking for the transfer. However, the branch was closed due to the Ram Navami holiday. After making the required arrangements and approvals, the bank completed the transfer on the same day in four different parts (tranches).

On the same day, the Commissioner of DIF, Bhopal, issued a letter temporarily stopping Bank of Baroda from handling government business.

According to the official order, the bank failed to follow government instructions related to the Chief Minister Kisan Yojana funds. An amount of about ₹1751 crore was supposed to be deposited under a specific government receipt head. However, the bank did not comply with these instructions. Due to this failure, the government said it suffered serious financial and administrative loss. Thus, the state government decided to stop Bank of Baroda from doing any government-related financial work for five years.

The bank quickly responded. On March 28, 2026, its zonal office submitted a written explanation to the concerned department. Later that same day, the Commissioner issued another letter cancelling the earlier order with immediate effect.

The bank clarified that since the restriction was removed within 24 hours, it did not disclose the matter to stock exchanges. It also confirmed that there was no financial or operational impact on the bank.

AIBOC has filed a writ petition in Delhi High Court against the new PLI scheme

AIBOC has filed a writ petition in Delhi High Court against the new PLI scheme for banks introduced by the Government of India. The petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. It challenges certain actions related to the Performance Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme. According to the notice, the case will be listed for hearing on 30 March 2026 at 10:30 AM, or shortly after that, depending on the court’s schedule. The petitioners are being represented by a team of lawyers, including Rajiv Agarwal, Meghna De, L. Gangmei, and N. Bhushan.

The petition has been filed by AIBOC, AIBEA and NCBE. UFBU has 9 constituents – AIBEA, AIBOC, NCBE, AIBOA, BEFI, INBEF, INBOC, NOBW, NOBO. Out of 9, only three unions have filed the petition against the new PLI scheme.

Important Points of Writ Petition

• The writ petition has been filed against the new PLI scheme dated 19.11.2024 in violation of Bipartite Settlement dated 08.03.2024.
• The impugned PLI Scheme is arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India.
• The matter is pending with CLC, still the Government has asked banks to credit PLI to senior executives.
• A PLI agreement was signed in Bipartite Settlement for all officers – Scale I to Scale VII but the PLI has been modified unilaterally
• During the signing of Bipartite Settlement, it was decided that the PLI scheme introduced under the 11th Bipartite Settlement and the 8th Joint Note dated 11.11.2020 will continue. But the Government ignored this settlement.
• Petitioners have request court to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ of similar nature quashing the new PLI scheme till the conclusion of the conciliation proceedings and issue a writ of mandamus or a writ of similar nature directing Govt to maintain status quo and pass order in favour of petitioners

PLI in PSU A 90s failed model -pushed in 2026 ,

A 90s failed model -pushed in 2026 ,

Many companies have already dropped it due to forced exclusion.

Now the division is clear: Even among Executives,

Top 20% get 100%

Bottom 20% get 0%

Flash strike is inevitable to save PSBs from these clowns.

#UFBU #plidiscrimination