Nationalisation of Banks in India

After independence the Government of India (GOI) adopted planned economic development for
the country (India). Accordingly, five-year plans came into existence since 1951. This economic
planning basically aimed at social ownership of the means of production. However, commercial
banks were in the private sector those days. In 1950-51 there were 430 commercial banks. The
Government of India had some social objectives of planning. These commercial banks failed
helping the government in attaining these objectives. Thus, the government decided to nationalize
14 major commercial banks on 19th July 1969. All commercial banks with a deposit base over
Rs.50 crores were nationalized. It was considered that banks were controlled by business houses
and thus failed in catering to the credit needs of poor sections such as cottage industry, village
industry, farmers, craft men, etc. The second dose of nationalisation came in April 1980 when
banks were nationalized.

Objectives behind Nationalisation of Banks in India

The nationalisation of commercial banks took place with an aim to achieve following major
objectives.

1. Social Welfare: It was the need of the hour to direct the funds for the needy and required
sectors of the Indian economy. Sector such as agriculture, small and village industries were
in need of funds for their expansion and further economic development.
2. Controlling Private Monopolies: Prior to nationalisation many banks were controlled by
private business houses and corporate families. It was necessary to check these monopolies
in order to ensure a smooth supply of credit to socially desirable sections.
3. Expansion of Banking: In a large country like India the numbers of banks existing those
days were certainly inadequate. It was necessary to spread banking across the country. It
could be done through expanding banking network (by opening new bank branches) in the
un-banked areas.
4. Reducing Regional Imbalance: In a country like India where we have a urban- rural
divide; it was necessary for banks to go in the rural areas where the banking facilities were
not available. In order to reduce this regional imbalance nationalisation was justified:
5. Priority Sector Lending: In India, the agriculture sector and its allied activities were the
largest contributor to the national income. Thus, these were labeled as the priority sectors.
But unfortunately, they were deprived of their due share in the credit. Nationalisation was
urgently needed for catering funds to them.
6. Developing Banking Habits: In India more than 70% population used to stay in rural
areas. It was necessary to develop the banking habit among such a large population.

Demerits, Limitations - Bank Nationalisation in India

Though the nationalisation of commercial banks was undertaken with tall objectives, in many
senses it failed in attaining them. In fact, it converted many of the banking institutions in the loss-
making entities. The reasons were obvious lethargic working, lack of accountability, lack of profit
motive, political interference, etc. Under this backdrop it is necessary to have a critical look to the
whole process of nationalisation in the period after bank nationalisation.

1|Page
The major limitations of the bank nationalisation in India are: -

1. Inadequate banking facilities: Even though banks have spread across the country; still
many parts of the country are unbanked. Especially in the backward states such as the Uttar
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and north-eastern states of India.
2. Limited resources mobilized and allocated: The resources mobilized after the
nationalisation is not sufficient if we consider the needs of the Indian economy. Sometimes
the deposits mobilized are enough, but the resource allocation is not as per the expansions.
3. Lowered efficiency and profits: After nationalisation banks went in the government
sector. Many times, political forces pressurized them. Banking was not done on a
professional and ethical grounds. It resulted into lower efficiency and poor profitability of
banks.
4. Increased expenditure: Due to huge expansion in a branch network, large staff
administrative expenditure, trade union struggle, etc. banks expenditure increased to a
dangerous level.
5. Political and Administrative Inference: Many public sector banks badly suffered due to
the political interference. It was seen in arranging loan meals. It ultimately resulted in huge
non-performing assets (NPA) of these banks and inefficiency.

R.C. COOPER v UNION OF INDIA

Popularly known as the Bank Nationalisation case of 1970 was a major landmark judgement as it
guided the parliament and dealt with the constitutional jurisprudence of the nation. Another reason
why this case is so important is the fact that it overruled or rejected the mutual exclusivity theory
provided or given in the case of A.K. Gopalan v State of Madras. This case was filed as a result of
the nationalisation of the 14 banks within the duration of the Congress party under the leadership
of Indira Gandhi in the year 1969. These banks were nationalised due to the reason that Rustom
Cavasjee had filed this suit because he was a major shareholder of the Bank of Baroda and Central
Bank of India, both of which were nationalised. Through this petition, he claimed that his
fundamental rights under Article 13, Article 14, Article 19 and Article 31 were violated. It was
held that the government had violated the Article 31 and Article 14. It was also held that any
shareholder or director cannot file a petition on the grounds that the company’s fundamental rights
have been violated. However, they can file a petition if that particular individual’s fundamental
rights have been violated. This landmark judgement was given by the Supreme Court of India on
the 2nd of February 1970 by a majority of 10:1.

OR

In Rustam Cawasjee Cooper v. Union of India (Bank Nationalisation Case) A.I.R. 1970
S.C. 564.

The constitutional validity of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1969, was challenged in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, by a majority of 10:1,
declared the Act invalid and unconstitutional because its provisions relating to the statutory
transfer of undertakings were void as they impaired the fundamental guarantee under Article 31(2)
of the Constitution.

2|Page
 Sajjan Bank (Private) Ltd. v. Reserve Bank of India, AIR 1961 Mad. 8

Facts:

1. The Sajjan Bank, a private bank, was incorporated in 1944 and started functioning in 1946.
2. After the Banking Companies Act came into effect in 1949, all banks were required to
obtain a license from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to continue operations.
3. Sajjan Bank applied for a license, but it was denied by the RBI.
4. The bank challenged the RBI's decision in the Madras High Court.

Judgement:

The court's judgment is not available in the provided reference (AIR 1961 Mad. 8). However,
based on other sources, it can be inferred that the court likely upheld the RBI's decision. The
Banking Companies Act empowered the RBI to grant licenses based on the bank's financial
condition and its ability to function in the depositors' interests. Inspections by the RBI might have
revealed shortcomings in Sajjan Bank's operations, justifying the license denial.

Nationalization of Banks in India

1. Background: Following independence, India pursued planned economic development,

aiming for social ownership of production. Existing private banks did not fully support this
goal.
2. Objectives:
a. Social Welfare: Prioritize credit to agriculture, small industries, etc.
b. Control Private Monopolies: Prevent concentration of financial power.
c. Banking Expansion: Reach unbanked populations, especially in rural areas.
d. Reduce Regional Imbalance: Spread banking facilities more evenly.
e. Priority Sector Lending: Ensure credit flow to agriculture and allied sectors.
f. Develop Banking Habits: Encourage greater financial inclusion.
3. Demerits:
a. Inadequate Coverage: Many areas still lack banking facilities.
b. Limited Resources: Mobilization and allocation not always sufficient for
economic needs.
c. Lower Efficiency & Profits: Bureaucracy and political interference hampered
performance.
d. Increased Expenditure: Expansion and staff costs led to higher expenses.
e. Political Interference: Loan decisions compromised, leading to non-performing
assets (NPAs).

Landmark Cases

1. R.C. Cooper v Union of India (Bank Nationalization Case, 1970)

a. Background: Challenge to the constitutionality of the 1969 nationalization of 14
banks.

3|Page
 b. Holding: Supreme Court struck down the Act, finding it violated Articles 14 and
31(2) (right to property).
c. Significance: Led to heightened scrutiny of government actions impacting
property rights.
2. Sajjan Bank (Private) Ltd. v. Reserve Bank of India, AIR 1961 Mad. 8
a. Background: A private bank's challenge to the RBI's denial of a banking license.
b. Likely Holding: The court probably upheld the RBI's decision, as the Banking
Companies Act gave wide discretion to the RBI in licensing based on the bank's
financial health and adherence to the interests of depositors.

Key Points and Overall Assessment

1. Bank nationalization in India had a mixed impact. While it enhanced access to banking and
promoted development in some sectors, it also resulted in inefficiencies and political
interference.
2. The landmark cases illustrate the tension between government's social and economic goals
and the fundamental rights of citizens.

4|Page