Maharashtra Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) minister Babasaheb Patil has been removed from the Latur District Central Cooperative Bank’s board by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) over an alleged breach of the 10-year tenure limit for directors.
This follows a complaint alleging that Patil had continued as a director of the Latur bank for more than 10 years, in violation of provisions governing cooperative bank boards.
Patil, however, has called the decision “improper” and said he will challenge it in the high court.
Under Sections 10A(2A)(i) and 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, any director of a cooperative bank who has completed a continuous tenure of 10 years on or after August 1, 2025, the date on which the relevant amendment came into force, shall be ineligible to continue in office.
Satish Sheshrao Jadhav, a member and authorised voter representative of the Latur District Central Cooperative Bank, filed a complaint with the RBI on May 25, alleging that the state cooperation minister himself had violated the norms, as he was one of the bank’s 19 directors who had crossed the 10-year tenure limit. He sought their disqualification.
The petitioner also sought cancellation of what he described as illegal recruitment at the bank and demanded the appointment of an administrator, triggering controversy.
{{/usCountry}}The petitioner also sought cancellation of what he described as illegal recruitment at the bank and demanded the appointment of an administrator, triggering controversy.
{{/usCountry}}The matter subsequently reached the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court. On August 3, the court directed the competent authority to decide Jadhav’s complaint on its merits within six weeks.
Following the court’s intervention and the objections raised in the complaint, seven of the eight directors named in it resigned, but Patil chose not to step down. The RBI has directed his removal from the bank’s board before the court-mandated deadline expired.
Meanwhile, Patil has disputed the RBI’s interpretation of the tenure provision. “The RBI’s decision is improper as we cannot be removed under that particular** provision. Hence, I will challenge it before the high court in my capacity as a bank director,” he said.