FYI, no great HDFC renunciation his

Prince Siddhartha Gautama renounced worldly life after witnessing specific things: sufferings of old age, sickness and death, and an ascetic who inspired him. Beyond a cryptic statement, 'Certain happenings and practices within the bank that I have observed over last two years are not in congruence with my personal values and ethics,' we are clueless about what caused HDFC Bank chairman Atanu Chakraborty's 'Great Renunciation'. He certainly has done no service to HDFC Bank. Its shares fell on the news, and the bank's board has had to issue assurances about governance standards and capital buffers. RBI clarified it has no concerns over the management of India's second-largest bank.

Chakraborty would have been bound to take up any material issue with the bank's management for corrective action if necessary. He was also free to escalate matters to RBI. Yet, he chose neither course. As HDFC's chairman, he had a responsibility to shareholders that should have been upheld even in his decision to resign. There has been little public airing about contrasting cultures or ethical divergence so far. RBI is a conservative regulator, and it holds systemically important institutions such as HDFC Bank to particularly high standards of governance. The central bank had cleared Chakraborty's appointment as chairman, and will be involved in the leadership transition after his departure. Interim chairman Keki Mistry, who has been with HDFC almost since it was founded, has described Chakraborty's resignation as a 'personal relationship' issue. That is as mystical as banking is material.

HDFC Bank is India's most valuable bank by market capitalisation, with extensive FII holdings. This offers the bank's customers and investors comfort over corporate governance and management practices. Individual differences over managerial approach should not be conflated with serious issues of corporate governance. The bank, and its former chairman, should have handled their parting of ways with greater composure. Vague virtue signalling serves no one.