The Supreme Court of India on April 1 dismissed a special leave petition that contested the Bombay High Court’s decision to overturn the directions issued by the Goa State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities against a Canara Bank official. The bank official was accused of treating a caregiver of a person with an intellectual disability in a discriminatory and rude manner.
The High Court had quashed the Commissioner's order, ruling that the State Commission for Persons with Disabilities does not have the authority to impose mandates on how bank officials should behave. The order initially required the official to undergo an eight-day mandatory disability training, all bank officials to receive disability sensitization training, and a written public apology to be issued to the caregiver.
A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran upheld the High Court's decision and refused to interfere with its ruling.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate S. Muralidhar, representing the petitioner, presented his arguments before the court. However, Justice Dhulia questioned:
“Was the daughter [who is the person with a disability] in the bank herself? She was not there, only the caregiver was present. Where does the Commissioner get the power to do all these things?”
Justice K Vinod Chandran also commented on the matter, stating that the bank had merely requested Know Your Customer (KYC) documentation and nothing more. The petitioner, however, argued that the issue was not about KYC compliance but rather about the discriminatory behavior exhibited by the bank official.
Read Also:- Senior Advocate Criticized by Supreme Court Again for False Assertions in Bail Petition
Background of the Case
The petitioner, a father of a girl with mental disabilities, had opened a joint bank account with his daughter at the Porvorim branch of Canara Bank upon the request of her school a few years ago. However, due to inactivity, the account had become dormant. The bank later sent a notice asking the petitioner to reactivate the account.
To comply, the petitioner visited the bank to deposit a cheque made out in his daughter’s name. The cheque represented funds previously invested in a private company. Acting as her caregiver, the petitioner submitted an application along with relevant documents, including his daughter's birth certificate, to reactivate the account. However, the bank refused to process the request, insisting that the Aadhaar card of his daughter was necessary. Due to her disability, obtaining an Aadhaar card was not possible.
"Not only did the Bank Manager keep insisting on the Aadhaar card, but he also did so in a callous manner, completely impervious to the Petitioner's pleas. The Branch Manager treated the Petitioner with disrespect and showed no willingness to address his concerns. Not only did he refuse to review the Petitioner's documents, but he also scolded the petitioner harshly and quarreled with him instead of engaging in constructive dialogue to resolve the issue," the petition stated.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Questions Tamil Nadu Government Over ED Searches at TASMAC Headquarters
Following this incident, the petitioner approached the Goa State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, who ruled in favor of the petitioner, censuring the bank official and ordering remedial actions. However, this decision was later challenged in the Bombay High Court, which ruled that the Commissioner had overstepped his jurisdiction.
Case Details: SAGAR JAWDEKAR v. THE CANARA BANK AND ORS.|SLP(C) No. 8352/2025
