A significant development has emerged as 20 members from the CPM’s Kayamkulam Puthiyavila local committee have decided to step down in protest against the party’s decision to terminate five co-operative bank employees. This action follows allegations of their involvement in a gold mortgage fraud within the CPM-controlled Kandallur cooperative bank.
The employees in question, including bank chief accountant Ullas Bhanu, accountants Ambili and Rachel Paul, as well as senior clerks N S Jayalakshmi and K Rahul, were relieved of their duties based on a report submitted by an inquiry commission commissioned by the party. It’s important to note that 15 additional members have also submitted their resignations in tandem with these events.
The crux of the issue lies in the discontentment among the CPM members over the party’s unilateral decision to dismiss the bank staff without involving them in any consultations or internal discussions. Notably, one of the dismissed employees is a member of the CPM local committee, while another holds a membership within the party itself.
The circumstances surrounding this situation revolve around the bank’s handling of gold pledged by borrowers between 2016 and 2018. Allegedly, when these borrowers attempted to reclaim their pledged jewelry, they were informed that the bank had sold their ornaments due to their failure to adhere to stipulated timelines.
Subsequently, following complaints from bank members, the Department of Cooperation initiated an investigation. A special audit report prepared by the Co-operative Department recommended that the management committee and the secretary jointly pay compensation of Rs 49 lakhs along with 18% interest to the borrowers affected by this issue.
However, allegations suggest that the management committee disregarded this resolution, leading to the suspension of the employees. Furthermore, it is believed that these dismissals were carried out on the instructions of the CPM area committee.
Of the employees facing termination, three ultimately returned to their positions after paying the stipulated compensation. The remaining five, who declined to comply, were subsequently dismissed. Those who lost their jobs claim that they are being unfairly targeted for the faults of the managing committee, raising questions about the broader implications of this incident.
Post Your Comments