HDFC Bank legal review 'superfluous', says ex-chairman Atanu Chakraborty
Synopsis
Former HDFC Bank chairman Atanu Chakraborty has broken his silence on the bank's legal review of his resignation — calling it 'superfluous' and saying it missed the point entirely. With the review now clearing the way for a permanent chairman appointment, the unresolved question of what business practices actually prompted his exit remains conspicuously unanswered.
Key Takeaways
Atanu Chakraborty described HDFC Bank's external legal review of his resignation as 'caveated and superfluous', saying it focused on compliance rather than his substantive concerns.
The review was conducted by law firms Wadia Gandhy and Wilson Soni , relying on select internal interviews and board meeting minutes.
Chakraborty resigned in March 2025 , citing a conflict between certain business practices and his personal values; the bank said he named no specific incidents.
He acknowledged the AT-1 bond mis-selling case occurred during his tenure but declined to name the practices behind his resignation, citing boardroom confidentiality.
The RBI extended interim chairman Keki Mistry's term by a further 90 days ; the legal review is expected to pave the way for a permanent chairman appointment.
HDFC Bank shares fell 0.33% to ₹793.35 on the BSE as of 12:45 pm IST on 29 June .
Former HDFC Bank Chairman Atanu Chakraborty has publicly dismissed the bank's external legal review of his resignation as 'caveated and superfluous', arguing it concentrated almost entirely on compliance matters rather than the substantive concerns about certain business practices he had flagged to the board, according to reports.
What Chakraborty Said About the Review
The review was conducted by external law firms Wadia Gandhy and Wilson Soni, appointed by HDFC Bank. According to reports, the firms based their findings largely on select excerpts from internal official interviews and board meeting minutes — an approach Chakraborty reportedly found inadequate. He also claimed that despite making repeated requests, the board declined to share the terms of reference or the legal framework under which the two firms were engaged.
Chakraborty maintained that his resignation was rooted in a conflict between certain business practices at the bank and his personal values, and was intended primarily as a call for the board to undertake deeper introspection — not merely a compliance check.
The AT-1 Bond Mis-Selling Reference
In his remarks, Chakraborty acknowledged the AT-1 bond mis-selling case, confirming it occurred during his tenure. He said the bank had responded swiftly by putting in place multiple corrective measures. However, he stopped short of identifying the specific practices that ultimately drove his resignation, citing the need for boardroom confidentiality.
Background: Why Chakraborty Resigned
Chakraborty, who joined HDFC Bank's board in 2021, resigned in March 2025, stating in his letter that certain recent developments over the prior two years did not align with his ethics and values. The bank, for its part, clarified that he had not identified any specific incidents or behaviours that violated his principles. Chakraborty has since publicly reiterated that his exit was driven by a divergence in ideology and approach — not by any wrongdoing or malpractice within the institution.
Interim Leadership and What Comes Next
Following Chakraborty's departure, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) approved the appointment of Keki Mistry as interim part-time chairman for a three-month term beginning 19 March. The RBI subsequently granted Mistry a further 90-day extension. Mistry has indicated he sees no major concerns facing the bank in the wake of the transition.
The favourable legal review is now expected to clear the path for HDFC Bank to accelerate the appointment of a permanent chairman and the reappointment of Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan. Meanwhile, shares of HDFC Bank were trading 0.33% lower at ₹793.35 on the BSE, touching an intraday low as of 12:45 pm IST on 29 June.
Point of View
The pathway to a permanent chairman carries unacknowledged governance risk. HDFC Bank's credibility here depends less on the legal review's verdict and more on whether the board can demonstrate it took the underlying concerns seriously.
NationPress
29 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Atanu Chakraborty resign as HDFC Bank chairman?
Chakraborty resigned in March 2025, stating that certain developments at the bank over the prior two years did not align with his personal ethics and values. He has maintained his exit was driven by a divergence in philosophy and approach, and not by any wrongdoing or malpractice. He has declined to name the specific business practices involved, citing boardroom confidentiality.
What did Chakraborty say about the legal review of his resignation?
He described it as 'caveated and superfluous', arguing it focused primarily on compliance aspects rather than the broader concerns he had raised about certain business practices. He also said the board did not share the terms of reference or the legal framework under which the external firms were appointed, despite his repeated requests.
Who conducted HDFC Bank's legal review and what was their approach?
The review was conducted by external law firms Wadia Gandhy and Wilson Soni, appointed by HDFC Bank. According to reports, they based their findings largely on select excerpts from interviews with internal officials and board meeting minutes.
Who is the current interim chairman of HDFC Bank?
Keki Mistry was appointed by the RBI as interim part-time chairman for a three-month term beginning 19 March, following Chakraborty's resignation. The RBI has since granted Mistry a further 90-day extension. Mistry has indicated he sees no major concerns at the bank.
What happens next for HDFC Bank's leadership?
The favourable legal review is expected to allow HDFC Bank to expedite the appointment of a permanent chairman and the reappointment of Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan. No official timeline has been announced yet.
