August 9, 2024
Saugata Ray, under Rule 72(1), opposing the introduction of The Banking Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024
Sir, under Rule 72(1), I oppose the introduction of the Bill further to amend several laws. As has been pointed out, this Bill is entirely superfluous. It deals with amendments of the Banking Regulations Act to redefine substantial interests. Then again, it changes the Rules with regard to directors of cooperative banks. Then again, it goes to the State Bank of India Act and says that the unclaimed dividends would go to the Investor Education and Protection Act. Again, it goes to the State Bank of India Act to provide discretion to the public sector banks in the matter of remuneration of auditors. Now, this Bill is superfluous in the sense that all that this Bill is seeking to achieve can be achieved through administrative steps. If the banks are not reporting to the Reserve Bank of India, then steps can be taken against the banks under the present law. If the cooperatives, in which there is a lot of corruption throughout the country, are not functioning properly, the Banking Department can take steps against them. I totally object to the fact that they are saying that any unclaimed dividend would go to the Investor Education and Protection Fund, as a result of which we may complicate the resolution. Sir, Mr. Premachandran has pointed out that through one Bill, four different laws are sought to be amended. Is this the way legislation should happen in this country? Four Acts are sought to be amended through one Bill, which his unnecessary, superfluous and against the interest of the people. Hence, I oppose the introduction of the Bill.
