New Delhi- In a revelation that has sparked a debate on equity in public employment, the Central Government has informed Parliament that public sector banks cancelled the appointment of 20 candidates over the last three years due to insufficient credit history or low CIBIL scores. The data, tabled in the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday, has drawn sharp criticism from opposition members who argue that the practice penalizes financial vulnerability and undermines the constitutional promise of equality of opportunity.

Responding to a question raised by MP Dr. John Brittas, Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary confirmed that while the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) does not mandate a credit score as a pre-condition to apply for exams, candidates must ensure a "healthy credit history" at the time of joining. The minimum score required is determined by the individual policies of the participating banks' boards.

SBI Tops the List

According to the annexure provided by the government, the State Bank of India (SBI) accounted for the majority of the cancellations. Out of the 20 candidates whose appointments were withdrawn or offers cancelled between FY 2023-24 and February 28, 2026, SBI alone rescinded offers to 11 candidates. Other banks with recorded cancellations include Punjab National Bank (4 candidates), Central Bank of India (2), and Bank of Baroda (2). UCO Bank reported one such cancellation .

While the government described the number as "only 0.02%" of the total candidates selected through IBPS, the explanation has done little to quell concerns.

Defending the practice, the Ministry stated that the condition is meant to ensure "financial prudence and creditworthiness among potential employees," particularly those who will handle financial transactions, credit processing, and customer accounts in the future.

"The rationale is to encourage responsible credit behaviour among employees who are entrusted with public funds," the Minister's written reply stated .

However, the Ministry also clarified that this condition is "not applicable to candidates with no bank account/credit history," ensuring that those new to the banking system are not excluded.

'Outright Injustice': Brittas Hits Out

The response has triggered a strong reaction from Dr. John Brittas, who termed the policy a case of "Credit score over merit."

In a post following the release of the data, Dr. Brittas argued that the policy effectively penalizes candidates for "financial vulnerability," particularly those from poor and middle-class backgrounds. "It effectively penalizes candidates for ‘financial vulnerability’, particularly those from poor and middle class backgrounds who may have taken educational or medical loans in good faith but are struggling to repay them on due dates due to lack of employment. Even one unjust exclusion from public employment is unacceptable - 20 is indefensible. This sets a dangerous precedent: socio-economic background becoming a silent filter in public recruitment, undermining the constitutional promise of equality of opportunity in public employment", the parliamentarian said in the statement.