Madras High Court Sentenced Bank Employee and Wife to 5 years Jail

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has sentenced five people, including former officials of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Madurai, and a bank manager, to five years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and a total fine of ₹27 lakh.

Who Are the Convicted People?

The people sentenced by the court are:

1. Shri S. Kasimayan – Former Recovery Officer at DRT, Madurai.
2. Shri Selvaraj – Former Upper Division Clerk (UDC) at DRT, Madurai.
3. Shri N. Venkeeshwaran – Former Branch Manager of Dhanalakshmi Bank, Madurai.
4. Shri R. Rajesh Kannan – A private individual.
5. Smt. R. Anitha – Wife of Shri Selvaraj (the accused UDC of DRT, Madurai).

What Was the Crime?

The CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) filed a case on March 30, 2009, against these individuals. It was found that in 2008, Shri S. Kasimayan, who was the Recovery Officer at DRT, fraudulently lowered the “Upset Price” of properties (the minimum price at which a property can be sold in an auction).

These five people conspired together to fix property prices much lower than the actual market value, causing a financial loss to the bank and the property owner. Meanwhile, they gained an unfair financial advantage for themselves.

Court Decisions Over the Years

1. CBI filed a chargesheet on June 6, 2011, after completing its investigation.
2. Trial Court Decision (December 7, 2016): The Trial Court acquitted all the accused, meaning they were found not guilty at that time.
3. CBI Appeals: CBI was not satisfied with the acquittal and filed an appeal against this decision.
4. High Court’s Decision: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court reviewed the case and overturned the acquittal, sentencing all five accused to five years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and fines:
   • Shri S. Kasimayan and Shri N. Venkeeshwaran – ₹6 lakh each
   • Shri Selvaraj, Shri R. Rajesh Kannan, and Smt. R. Anitha – ₹5 lakh each

Latest Development – Supreme Court’s Decision

One of the accused went to the Supreme Court for relief. On March 27, 2025, the Supreme Court allowed the High Court to continue with the sentencing but ruled that the punishment will remain suspended for three weeks.

Following this direction, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has suspended the sentence for now.

Bank Employees attacked in Maharashtra for not speaking Marathi

Disturbing events have been reported from Maharashtra where Bank Employees have been beaten for not speaking Marathi. 

Pune: Bank Employee beaten by MNS Workers for not speaking Marathi in Lonavala.

Bank Employee and His Wife missing in Jabalpur, Wife accused of Harassment

Anand Dubey, who works in a private bank in Jabalpur, and his wife Nibha have mysteriously gone missing. This came to light after Anand’s brother-in-law, Vinod, filed a complaint at the Aadhartal police station. Following the complaint, the police started investigating the case.

According to the family, Anand had been under a lot of stress since his marriage. There were frequent arguments between him and his wife, which made the situation tense. His family members tried several times to help them resolve their issues, but nothing worked.

Anand belongs to Kushli village in the Katangi police station area, and his wife Nibha is from the same place. Recently, Anand recorded a video in which he appeared very upset and accused his wife of harassing him.

In this four-minute-long video, Anand is seen crying and expressing his pain while sitting on the back of a bike. He says that he loves his wife very much, but she often fights with him over small issues. He also claims that she frequently records videos of him and threatens to falsely accuse him. At the beginning of the video, Anand also mentions that not only women but men too can be victims of domestic violence.

After this video went viral, his wife Nibha also went missing. Police station in-charge Rajkumar Khatik said that a missing person’s report has been filed. The police are now trying to find out whether Anand turned off his phone by himself or if something bad has happened to him. A police team is actively searching for both of them.

Nine Personal Finance Rules We all Must Know

Government announced New Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees

The Government of India has approved a new transfer policy for Public Sector Bank Employees. This new policy will be applicable from 1st April 2025. All Banks will have to follow the below guidelines:

New Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees

• 1. Rotational transfers should be based on seniority.
• 2. Online platform will be developed for the transfer process, allowing employees to choose location preferences.
• 3. Officers up to Scale-III should be accommodated in their respective linguistic regions.
• 4. Additional grounds for transfer should be included – such as marriage, spouse, medical needs, maternity, child care, and distant postings.
• 5. Efforts should be made to post employees in the same or nearby regions if their spouse works in Central or State Governments.
• 6. Women employees should be transferred to nearby locations.
• 7. Employees can appeal against unfair transfer. A grievance committee should be formed and appeals should be resolved within 15 days. Appeals should be dealt with kindly and committee should try to resolve the issue and proper reason should be given in writing.
• 8. Transfer protection may not be given to office bearers of unions on
• 
  

  The Government of India has approved a new transfer policy for Public Sector Bank Employees. This new policy will be applicable from 1st April 2025. All Banks will have to follow the below guidelines:

  New Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees

  • 1. Rotational transfers should be based on seniority.
  • 2. Online platform will be developed for the transfer process, allowing employees to choose location preferences.
  • 3. Officers up to Scale-III should be accommodated in their respective linguistic regions.
  • 4. Additional grounds for transfer should be included – such as marriage, spouse, medical needs, maternity, child care, and distant postings.
  • 5. Efforts should be made to post employees in the same or nearby regions if their spouse works in Central or State Governments.
  • 6. Women employees should be transferred to nearby locations.
  • 7. Employees can appeal against unfair transfer. A grievance committee should be formed and appeals should be resolved within 15 days. Appeals should be dealt with kindly and committee should try to resolve the issue and proper reason should be given in writing.
  • 8. Transfer protection may not be given to office bearers of unions on promotion.

  ---

  Public Sector Bank New Transfer Policy: The Government of India has introduced a new Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees. The Department of Financial Services under Ministry of Finance has released a circular regarding new transfer policy of PSU Bank Staff. The Government Bank Employees have been complaining for quite a long time regarding the unfair transfer policy prevailing in the banks. The DFS has mentioned in its circular that the reason for the introduction of this new transfer policy is – complaints.

  The DFS has said that it received a lot a complaints regarding the transfer policy in PSBs via various modes and thus, the new transfer policy for Public Sector Bank Employees was introduced. We have also created a video on New Transfer Policy of Bank Staff. You can watch video and understand policy in an easy way. You can also download PDF of New Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees via link given below.

  New Transfer Policy for Public Sector Bank Employees: Government instructions

  • Administrative Layers: Banks must define the hierarchy of administrative layers, such as Region, Zone, Circle, and FGMO (Field General Manager’s Office). For each layer, minimum and maximum tenure durations should be clearly specified to ensure consistency in employee placements and career progression.
  • Transfer Timelines: Banks should establish a strict timeline for conducting transfer exercises, aiming to complete all transfers before June each year. Mid-year transfers should be minimized and limited to situations involving promotions or critical administrative requirements.
  • Transparency in Transfers: Banks should ensure transparency by annually publishing seniority lists and existing/expected vacancies. Rotational transfers should be based on seniority, with exceptions documented.
  • Automation of Transfer Process: Banks should develop an online platform for the transfer process, allowing employees to express location preferences. The portal should include transfer policies, guidelines, seniority lists, and vacancy details.
  • Regional Accommodation: To improve customer service, banks should aim to place officers (up to Scale-III) within their linguistic regions, wherever feasible. This would ensure better communication with customers while balancing vacancies and administrative needs.
  • Difficult Areas Designation: Certain regions should be officially designated as Difficult Areas, recognizing the challenges faced by employees posted there. Employees completing their tenure in these regions should be prioritized for transfers to preferred or less-demanding locations.
  • Incorporation of Additional Grounds: Banks should include additional grounds for transfer such as marriage, spouse, medical needs, maternity, child care, and distant postings.
  • Spouse Employment Consideration: Efforts should be made to place employees in the same or nearby region as their spouse if the latter is employed with the Central or State Governments. This helps maintain work-life balance and family unity.
  • Women Employees’ Transfers: Banks should transfer women employees to nearby locations whenever possible, ensuring their safety and access to basic amenities in remote postings.
  • Grievance Handling: Grievances arising from perceived violations of the transfer policy must be addressed thoroughly. Banks should ensure that grievances undergo detailed deliberations, with responses properly documented to maintain transparency and accountability.
  • Appeals Committee: A dedicated Appeals Committee should be established to review transfer-related appeals. This committee must resolve appeals within 15 days to avoid prolonged delays and employee dissatisfaction.
  • Transfer Protection for Office Bearers: Banks should clearly define the position, tenure, and applicability of transfer protection for office bearers of Associations/Unions. Transfer protection may not be provided to office bearers upon promotion.

Govt has put Bank Privatisation Proposal on Hold

As per the sources, the central government has put on hold its plan to privatise two public-sector banks (PSBs). Recently, the Government of India had announced to privatise some public sector banks. But now the plan has been postponed as the PSU Banks are now profitable and have reported a robust performance. The main reasons for the postponement of Bank Privatisation are – Strong Protest from Bank Unions and Public Trust in PSU Banks.

In recent years, PSBs have reported strong financial growth, even outperforming some private banks. Their combined net profit surged to ₹1.41 lakh crore in 2023-24, up from ₹1.05 lakh crore in 2022-23.

Experts had anticipated that the government would proceed with privatisation process of PSU Banks after the completion of the general elections in May 2024. But this did not happen. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had initially announced plans to privatise two PSBs in the Union Budget for 2021-22, aligning with the new Public Sector Enterprise (PSE) policy, which aimed to limit the number of public-sector players in strategic sectors to four. The decision was also intended to boost competition in the banking sector and drive overall growth.

However, the government has yet to finalise the necessary amendments to key laws, including the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Acts of 1970 and 1980 and the Banking Regulation Act of 1949, which are required to facilitate privatisation.

Why is the Government not privatizing PSU Banks?

It’s not so easy for the Government to privatize PSU Banks. These are very big banks and are crucial for the growth of the Indian Economy. Moreover, people trust public-sector banks in India. After the failure of YES Bank and recent negative news about IndusInd Bank, there might be a change in the thinking of the government and senior officials. Through the public sector banks, the government has direct control over various parameters of the economy. Moreover, the government has connected the common public with these public sector banks via various government-sponsored schemes. Private Sector Banks focus mainly on generating profit and there is also fear that these banks might not pay so much interest in promoting government schemes.

Apart from this, the privatization proposal has faced strong opposition from bank unions and employees. Unions argue that PSU Banks play a crucial role in nation-building by channeling public savings into priority sectors such as agriculture. These banks are the reason behind the rapid economic development of India. Bank Unions have threatened strikes against privatization. This ongoing resistance is seen as a key reason behind the government’s hesitation to move forward with its privatisation plans.

IDBI Bank Privatisation

The privatisation of IDBI Bank remains a contentious issue. There are reports that the privatisation of IDBI Bank is under process. According to DIPAM Secretary Arunish Chawla, the divestment process is expected to be completed within three months. Meanwhile, the employees are protesting against this privatisation. MP Supriya Sule has opposed further divestment, arguing that the bank is profitable. Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi recently met with IDBI employees to discuss their concerns. The government and LIC are jointly selling a 61% stake in IDBI Bank, with the Centre holding 30.48% and LIC 30.24%.

Bank Mitra Sentenced to Three Years in Jail for Embezzling ₹7 Lakh

A Bank Mitra working under Punjab National Bank (PNB) in Aliganj has been sentenced to three years in jail and fined ₹10,000 for misappropriating customers’ 

What Happened?

Chaitanya Babu Saxena, a resident of Gaini village in the Aliganj police station area, was employed as a Bank Mitra at the PNB branch in Gaini. His job was to help customers with banking transactions. However, instead of depositing ₹7,06,000 into the customers’ accounts, he kept the money for himself and issued fake receipts.

The fraud came to light when customers tried to withdraw their money and found that the funds were never deposited in their accounts. Upon realizing the fraud, the affected customers filed a complaint, and a case was registered against Saxena.

Legal Proceedings and Court Verdict

The case continued for five years in court. After reviewing all the evidence, the Judicial Magistrate Second Court in Amla, under Judge Vidisha Bhushan, found Saxena guilty of embezzlement. As a result, he was sentenced to three years in prison and fined ₹10,000.

Prosecution officer Ravi Prakash Mishra stated that strong evidence and testimonies from 17 affected customers played a crucial role in securing justice. The prolonged legal battle finally ended with a judgment that ensured accountability.

MINISTER ON 12th BPS and PENSION.

Dear Friends please read the topic.....  FINANCE MINISTER ON 12th BPS and PENSION.

     𝐅𝐄𝐄𝐃𝐁𝐀𝐂𝐊#𝟓3

        👇👇👇👇👇

[29/03, 2:27 am] 

P&Sind. Bk. Jalndhr. JoginderSingh Saini: 

📞+91 99140 82395

Sir,you might have listened the lecture of Fin.Min speaking yesterday in parliament about the 12th bps with increase in Exgratia for retirees/pensioners. Kindly send your views.👍

JoginderSingh Saini

[29/03, 3:36 am] 

Can. Bk.

 *Gunasekaran R* : 

📞 *+91 94452 51039* 

 *Statement made by FM in Parliament as regard to Bank Employees and Pensioners.* 

 *https://youtu.be/i21hHGrGrn4?si=VzHtkf_Bua4czKo6* 

 *She is narrating just what already granted in 12th Bipartite Settlement.*

 *She is explaining about Exgratia amount increased to ₹10000/ to Retirees prior to 1986.* 

 *𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐪𝐮𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐁𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟐. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝟏𝟐𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝟏𝟒 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝟑𝟎 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐲.* 

 *Pensioners were given Exgratia as a one time measure only for this Settlement period* *(2022 to 27).* 

 *No other assurance. Residual issues  of both 11th and 12th Bipartite Settlement were handled (NOT SETTLED).* 

 *As regard to depriving the benefits 8th Pay Commission to pre existing Central government Pensioners by way of Amendments to Central Civil Service Rules* *𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙖𝙣 𝙚𝙮𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙦𝙪𝙤𝙩𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙖𝙢𝙚 𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝘽𝙖𝙣𝙠 𝙋𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙪𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙈 𝘾 𝙎𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙡𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙨𝙚.* 

 *𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐀𝐌𝐌𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐌𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐒 𝐃𝐄𝐏𝐑𝐈𝐕𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐄𝐍𝐄𝐅𝐈𝐓𝐒 𝐓𝐎 𝐏𝐑𝐄-𝐄𝐗𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐏𝐄𝐍𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐄𝐑𝐒 𝐒𝐇𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐂𝐑𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐘 𝐎𝐅 𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐓𝐒 𝐀𝐒 𝐏𝐄𝐑 𝐃𝐒 𝐍𝐀𝐊𝐀𝐑𝐀 𝐂𝐀𝐒𝐄 𝐀𝐋𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐃𝐘 𝐒𝐄𝐓𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐃 𝐈𝐍 𝐒𝐔𝐏𝐑𝐄𝐌𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐓* ‼️

 *𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚 𝙞𝙨,  𝙋𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙬𝙞𝙡𝙡 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙖𝙘𝙝 𝙅𝙪𝙙𝙞𝙘𝙞𝙖𝙧𝙮 𝙖𝙜𝙖𝙞𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙖𝙜𝙖𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙤 𝙜𝙚𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙀𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙩𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩.* 

 *𝙊𝙉𝘾𝙀 𝘼𝙉 𝙄𝙎𝙎𝙐𝙀 𝙎𝙀𝙏𝙏𝙇𝙀𝘿 𝙄𝙉 𝙎𝙐𝙋𝙍𝙀𝙈𝙀 𝘾𝙊𝙐𝙍𝙏, 𝙄𝙏 𝘽𝙀𝘾𝙊𝙈𝙀𝙎 𝙇𝘼𝙒 𝘼𝙉𝘿 𝙏𝙃𝙀 𝙂𝙊𝙑𝙀𝙀𝙉𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙏  𝙋𝙍𝙀𝙏𝙀𝙉𝘿𝙎 𝙏𝙊 𝘽𝙀 𝙐𝙉𝘼𝙒𝘼𝙍𝙀 𝙊𝙁 𝙄𝙏 𝙁𝙊𝙍 𝙏𝙃𝙀 𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙎𝙊𝙉 𝘽𝙀𝙎𝙏 𝙆𝙉𝙊𝙒𝙉 𝙏𝙊 𝙏𝙃𝙀𝙈 𝙊𝙉𝙇𝙔*  

 *𝑮𝒖𝒏𝒂𝒔𝒆𝒌𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒏 𝑹* 

[29/03, 1:45 am] 

United Bk. Pune 

 *Sudershan singh Dhawan, I* :

📞 *+91 98119 21225* 

Mr.Murti, sir Many thanks to u for ur best efforts but no success seems to be possible due to wicked minded  of this Nexus Group who are always getting date after date just to harass the bank pensioners.

It is their birth right to work against we bank pensioners and it appears that if succeeded in getting new day it will be their victory in cheating and harassing us again and there is no end to it . 

But u are too are bent upon in conveying message that updation is for sure and certain through supreme court Alone. 

If this time any date is extended can we appeal sewa Ram to declare in court that if they had failed to act for updation of bank pensioners after lapse of thirty years can the judge endorse this Nexus and all no justice to bank pensioners within a limited time as further extended dates are leading to more death in despair and we all including court are being blamed with others and can they decide any date after which no extention is permitted by court. If the authorities getting date after date it is better to demand refund of our spf amount with interest by cancelling this pension agreement signed in 1993 and no respect to it is being showered by IBA and it's partners and neglected the small parliament committee recommendations for raising pension with the rise in aging of bank pension. It is very high handed brutality to bank pensioners or court may suggest any other alternative for both parties how to close this drama of pension as Enough is Enough as it has crossed the world record in pension history in India where legislatures are getting big rise in their monthly pension with other perks.

 *_Sudershan singh Dhawan_* 

        (Camp:USA)

[29/03, 5:28 am] Devulapalli Murti: 🙏

[28/03, 10:36 pm] 

Can. Bk. Chennai 

 *Subramani S:* 

📞 *+91 99406 23345* 

Now it is very clear - the hearing is not taking place and in the foreseeable future too. We have to wait almost endlessly .

 _*Subramani S*_ 

[28/03, 10:06 pm] 

IOB. Mumbai. 

 *Vishnu Shinde* : 

📞 *+91 98923 40369* 

Thank you, Murti sir, for updating the development of the M C Singla case.

 _*Vishnu Shinde*_

Woman Blackmails Bank Officer with Photos, Police Complaint Filed

A disturbing case of blackmail has come to light where a woman is allegedly threatening a bank officer by using an AI-generated photo. She has edited the photo to make it appear as though the officer is posing with a young woman in an objectionable manner. The woman is demanding ₹2 lakh and has threatened to send the photo to the officer’s family if he refuses to pay.

How the Blackmail started?

The incident traces back to the officer’s posting in Chandauli district four years ago. During his tenure, he trained several women and young girls under an employment program. As part of the training process, photos of the participants were taken, following standard procedure.

It is alleged that the woman, who was one of the trainees, obtained a photo of her fellow participant and used it to create a doctored, AI-generated image. She is accused of hacking the young woman’s phone to access personal photos and then merging one of those photos with the officer’s image using AI technology.

After creating the manipulated photo, the woman began blackmailing the officer, initially demanding ₹5 lakh. When the officer didn’t comply, she lowered her demand to ₹2 lakh and threatened to send the fake image to his family.

Officer Seeks Police Help

Feeling trapped and concerned about his reputation, the bank officer, who is originally from Varanasi, approached the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and filed a formal complaint. The SSP immediately took action and handed the case over to the cyber police for a detailed investigation.

The cyber police are now investigating how the woman obtained access to the photo and whether others are involved in the scheme. They are also examining the extent to which AI technology was used to create the fake image.

Conclusion

This incident is a reminder of the rising misuse of AI technology, especially in cases of blackmail and cybercrime. People need to be cautious about sharing personal photos and must report any suspicious behavior to the police immediately. As cybercrime grows more sophisticated, law enforcement agencies are also stepping up efforts to combat such digital threats.

Age profile of Bank Pensioner and family pensioner bank wise list

UFBU asks Banks to Postpone New PLI Scheme for Senior Officials

 

 

The United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU) has asked the Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) to delay the implementation of the Performance Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme for senior bank officials. The UFBU believes that the scheme, introduced by the Department of Financial Services (DFS), could negatively impact the career growth and promotion chances of thousands of senior bank officers. UFBU has asked all public sector banks – State Bank of India (SBI), Punjab National Bank (PNB), Bank of Baroda (BOB), Canara Bank, Union Bank, Indian Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, Punjab & Sind Bank, Bank of India, Central Bank of India, UCO Bank, to delay the implementation of this new PLI scheme. First let’s understand what is this new PLI Scheme. 

What is the new PLI Scheme for Senior Officers of Public Sector Banks?

The Performance Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme is a new system that will decide promotions and career progress based on an officer’s performance and achievements instead of the traditional seniority-based approach. The scheme applies to bank officers in Scale IV and above, which includes senior managers, chief managers, and general managers in public sector banks.

Under the new government-imposed rule, PLI for Scale IV officers and above will be calculated differently, leading to huge differences in payments. Scale 1, Scale 2 and Scale 3 Officers will get normal PLI but Scale IV and above officers will get almost double salary.

• Scale IV officers can get 70% of their annual basic pay (approximately ₹11.75 lakh per year).
• Scale V and VI officers can get 80% of their annual basic pay (approximately ₹14.40 lakh per year).
• Scale VII officers can get 90% of their annual basic pay (approximately ₹22.50 lakh per year).
Bank loan

PLI Ceiling for Each Category of Employees in Public Sector Banks

Grade	PLI Ceiling as % of Annual Basic Pay
EDs and MDs of Nationalised Banks, DMDs, MDs, and Chairman of SBI	100%
Scale VII and Scale VIII	90%
Scale V and Scale VI	80%
Scale IV	70%

Why is UFBU Against Immediate Implementation of new PLI Scheme for Government PSU Banks?

UFBU is not completely against the PLI scheme but wants it to be properly reviewed before it is implemented. The union is concerned that:

• The scheme might limit promotions: If implemented in its current form, the PLI scheme may reduce the chances of promotions for many experienced officers.
• Unfair impact on senior officials: Many officers who have worked in banks for a long time may find it difficult to meet the new performance criteria, affecting their job security and career growth.
• Banks are rushing to implement it: Despite an agreement to review the scheme, some banks like State Bank of India (SBI), Canara Bank, and Punjab National Bank (PNB) have already issued circulars asking employees to follow the PLI guidelines.

What Happened in the Meetings Between UFBU and IBA?

The issue was discussed in two conciliation meetings held on March 18 and March 21, 2025, at the office of the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central). These meetings were held because UFBU had given a strike notice on March 5, 2025, demanding a review of the PLI scheme.

During these meetings:

• IBA agreed to collect feedback from different banks and submit a report to DFS for reconsideration of the scheme.
• UFBU expected that banks would wait for this review before implementing the scheme, but some banks started implementing it immediately through official circulars.

Since some banks have started implementing the scheme before the review process is complete, UFBU has written to IBA, asking them to advise banks to delay the implementation until proper discussions take place. UFBU has also sent a letter to the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Ministry of Labour, requesting the government to intervene and stop the premature implementation of the scheme.