In August 2025,
Moneylife reported the ordeal of a nominee, Geeta Aiyer, who fought an exhausting eight-month battle with State Bank of India (SBI) to claim her late mother’s lifetime arrears (LTA) of pension. Despite being the valid nominee, she was met with stonewalling, misinformation and even outright denial from SBI's Centralised Pension Processing Centre (CPPC) at Belapur, Navi Mumbai. Her persistence eventually led to an article in
Moneylife, which exposed the inordinate delays and highlighted the lack of accountability in India’s largest bank. (
Read: How a Nominee Fought 8 Months of SBI Red Tape To Claim Mother’s Pension Arrears)
That article turned out to be the turning point. Once the story was published, Moneylife’s managing editor brought the matter to the attention of the ethics executive in the office of the SBI chairman. The executive immediately acknowledged that the treatment given to Ms Aiyer was improper and initiated corrective action. This intervention by the top executives of SBI set in motion a series of steps that ultimately brought closure to the case.
Within a day of publication, both officials from CPCC, who had handled the matter, contacted Ms Aiyer—one asking her to withdraw the complaint, the other sending a message expressing regret. Shortly after, senior officers from SBI’s local head office (LHO) at Bandra-Kurla Complex (BKC), including the deputy general manager (DGM) and assistant general manager (AGM) for customer services and the branch head, visited her residence. They spent over an hour reviewing documents and hearing her account of how she was made to run from pillar to post. During this meeting, the officials agreed to consider compensating her for the long delay and also promised to arrange a face-to-face meeting with the CPPC staff responsible for her harassment.
By mid-September, SBI credited the interest due to her account. The credit entry itself was significant, as it clearly described the payment as ‘compensation for late receipt of lifetime arrears’. For Ms Aiyer, this was an acknowledgement not only of financial loss but also of the unjust treatment she endured.
A week later, she was invited to the Bank’s iconic Horniman Circle headquarters in south Mumbai for a formal meeting. The gathering was unusually large—nine senior officers, including three DGMs and two AGMs, were present, along with the two CPPC staff members who had previously dismissed her claims.
At the meeting, Ms Aiyer presented meticulous documentation showing the scale of indifference she had faced: 13 unanswered follow-up emails, multiple visits to Belapur and official letters that falsely stated she was not entitled to arrears. She also drew attention to broader issues—landline calls going unanswered, officials refusing to meet customers in person, unsigned letters sent out through office boys to avoid accountability and the lack of a proper customer interface.
When confronted with this evidence, the two CPPC staff had no defence beyond repeated apologies. Senior officers present at the meeting admitted to lapses and assured her that processes would be reviewed. Ms Aiyer requested that SBI make its pension arrears procedures visible and transparent, preferably by publishing them on its website, so that others are not forced to go through the same ordeal.
While the arrears were eventually paid with compensation to Ms Aiyer, this case highlights much larger concerns. Pensioners and nominees are often elderly, financially dependent, or not equipped to take on protracted bureaucratic battles.
Many may not even know how to escalate matters, and this case, too, may have ended in silence, except for the long and meticulous battle by Ms Aiyer. It is telling that action came only after public exposure and direct involvement from the Bank’s highest levels. From the ground up, the nominee’s repeated complaints, visits and documents produced no results.
The resolution is undoubtedly a victory for persistence and public accountability. Yet, it should serve as a wake-up call for SBI and other banks. Robust systems, transparent processes and empathetic handling of pensioners and their families cannot depend on exceptional interventions from the chairman’s office or the media. They must be built into everyday functioning at every branch and processing centre.
The behaviour of bank officers was brought to the attention of the head office only because Moneylife escalated the matter. For thousands of others without similar visibility, such battles may remain unresolved. It is a stark reminder that in a system as vast as SBI’s, empathy and accountability must not be optional extras—they must be the foundation of customer service.
You may also want to read…
In fact it applies to ALL Bank employees...
After about 9 months, I was again deputed for the previous center, where I again remained there at for about 4 months.
Neither the Bank paid me the deputation allowance nor any transfer allowance for which I was eligible. After my next transfer, the Bank put my name on the board of Roll of Honour.
I had sent number of letters to the CGM Chandigarh and Corporate Office Mumbai but all in vains.
I am a retired and senior citizen and can not fight with the Bank.
Can anyone help me ????.
Gobinder Singh Patiala
I am f
This goes above and beyond - so truly impressive on MoneyLife's part to be able to get the top management to accept the calamitous "service" they provided.
Because of MoneyLife - I have seen numerous articles highlighting the plight of customers who have to keep fighting even after winning court cases (or consumer court cases).
Good to see a change in the positive direction.