The bank informed stock exchanges that the review, announced in March this year, has now been completed. It was conducted by Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and Wadia Ghandy & Co., which examined whether concerns raised by Chakraborty in his resignation letter were supported by evidence and whether he had recorded any dissent that was not addressed.
According to the filing, the three-month review involved examining thousands of documents, including Board and committee meeting minutes, agenda papers and other records covering the two years preceding Chakraborty’s resignation.Sources suggest that the law firms have gone through board communications and e-mails pertaining to last two years in build-up to Chakraborty’s resignation.
The law firms also interviewed all independent directors, including committee chairpersons, HDFC Bank Managing Director & CEO, and senior executives responsible for control and assurance functions.
The bank said both it and the external law firms repeatedly requested Chakraborty to participate in the review, but an interview with him ultimately did not take place.In their report submitted to the Board, the law firms concluded that Chakraborty’s statement “and its implications were not substantiated by the record and witness interviews.”
They found no contemporaneous evidence in Board or committee minutes, meeting materials or related communications supporting the concerns raised in his resignation statement. Witness interviews also did not corroborate his allegations.
The review further noted that Board meeting minutes underwent a comprehensive drafting, review and approval process, during which Chakraborty had opportunities to record any objections or concerns if he believed the proceedings were inconsistent with his personal values or ethics.
However, the investigators found no evidence that he had formally recorded any such dissent.
The report also addressed Chakraborty’s post-resignation public references to the Dubai matter, stating that investigators found no contemporaneous evidence indicating that he had raised ethical concerns or disagreed with decisions taken by the Board or its committees on that issue or any other matter during his tenure.
Also Read: Exclusive | Atanu Chakraborty breaks silence on HDFC Exit, says values and ethics at core
(Edited by : Ajay Vaishnav)
