Bombay High Court Upholds RBI Employee's Compulsory Retirement Over Unauthorized Absence

The Bombay High Court has ruled against an RBI employee's appeal for relief after his compulsory retirement due to unauthorized absences. The court highlighted the detrimental impact of such absences on public interest and confirmed the RBI's decision as justified. Animesh Bakuli, who had been absent since March 2020, failed to respond to multiple communications from the bank. Despite his claims of being unable to report to work during the pandemic, the court found that he had been given sufficient opportunities to present his case during the disciplinary proceedings. This ruling underscores the importance of adherence to workplace regulations and the consequences of misconduct.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jun 14, 2026, 15:20 IST

Court Ruling on RBI Employee's Absence

In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court denied relief to a Reserve Bank of India (RBI) employee who was dismissed from his position due to unauthorized absences. The court emphasized that such absences could harm public interest and constitute serious misconduct. The case involved Animesh Bakuli, a senior assistant at the RBI, who had been absent from his duties for an extended period without authorization.

The bench, comprising Justices R I Chagla and Advait Sethna, stated in their June 10 order that Bakuli's unauthorized absence was indeed detrimental to public interest and warranted dismissal. The court dismissed Bakuli's appeal, affirming that the RBI's decision to retire him compulsorily was justified.

Bakuli had challenged the RBI's February 2023 decision, which was based on his prolonged absence. He also requested the court to direct the RBI to release his pending payments and allowances that had been withheld since December 2020.

Having worked at the RBI since 2013 and serving as a senior assistant since January 2018, Bakuli had previously requested a transfer to Kolkata to be closer to his parents, but these requests were denied. He had been absent from work since March 2020 without permission, despite multiple communications from the RBI urging him to return or submit a leave application with medical documentation.

After failing to respond to a show-cause notice and not attending inquiry meetings, the RBI proceeded with disciplinary action, ultimately leading to his compulsory retirement. Bakuli argued that he had left Mumbai for Kolkata during the COVID-19 pandemic and claimed the inquiry process violated natural justice principles by not allowing him to present his case.

However, the court found that Bakuli had been given ample opportunities to participate in the proceedings. The RBI's actions were deemed necessary due to his unauthorized absence, and the court upheld the decision to initiate disciplinary measures.

In July 2020, during the pandemic, the RBI had issued a notice regarding the resumption of operations in its Central Office Departments, adhering to safety protocols.