Advanced Search

Communique

27 August 2025

The Bank of Mauritius (“the Bank”) has taken cognizance of media reports insinuating that it has taken punitive measures against one of its employees, Mr Chidanand Rughoobar, on account of his status as a trade unionist. Whilst stating that it has adhered strictly to the law, the statutory time limits, and its Terms and Conditions of Employment, the Bank categorically rejects such accusations, and wishes to set the record right as follows:

  1. On 13 July 2025, the Police arrested and detained Mr Chidanand Rughoobar, an analyst of the Bank for having wilfully and unlawfully made use of obscene words to the address of a Police officer in a public place. He was presented before the Weekend Court on the same day, and released on parole on condition that he appears before the District Court of Grand Port on the next day.
  2. On 14 July 2025, Mr Rughoobar appeared before the District Court of Grand Port, where a provisional criminal information of ‘rogue and vagabond’ was lodged against him.
  3. On the same day, Mr Rughoobar was released on bail by the District Magistrate of Grand Port, after having furnished surety and recognizance in the sum of Rs. 10,000 in respect of the said provisional charge of ‘rogue and vagabond’. He was warned to appear in court on 4 December 2025.
  4. On 16 July 2025, Mr Rughoobar informed the Bank that he attended the District Court of Grand Port on 14 July 2025 “in relation to a provisional charge stemming from an incident reported on 13 July 2025 at the Mahebourg Police Station”.
  5. On 16 July 2025, the Bank sought clarification from Mr Rughoobar on the full circumstances of the matter, as per paragraph 2.2.32 of the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment. To date, Mr Rughoobar has still not provided the Bank with the said full circumstances.
  6. On 21 July 2025, the Bank wrote to the Police to seek particulars of the provisional charge, and the nature of the incident reported on 13 July 2025, involving Mr Rughoobar.
  7. On 24 July 2025, Mr Rughoobar informed the Bank that the Police did not provide him with any information pertaining to the provisional charge, despite his being aware of same.
  8. On 25 July 2025, the Bank wrote to the District Court of Grand Port requesting for a certified copy of the court record in the matter of Police v. Chidanand Rughoobar [CN 1276/2025 - Rogue and Vagabond]
  9. On 31 July 2025, the Police wrote to the Bank providing the requested information. It must be highlighted that, as at that date, the Bank had still not received a copy of the court record from the District Court of Grand Port.
  10. On 8 August 2025, the Bank wrote to Mr Rughoobar:
  1. informing him that the Police had provided the Bank with information relating to his arrest and the provisional charge against him;
  2. requesting him to show cause, withing ten days, why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him on the ground that he had, contrary to paragraph 2.2.32 of the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment, failed to inform the Bank without delay of the full circumstances of his arrest, detention and provisional charge; and
  3.  informing him that the Bank’s enquiry was still ongoing.
  1. It is thus patently clear that the Bank’s decision of 8 August 2025 to request Mr Rughoobar to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him, as aforesaid, was notified to him within 10 days of the Bank being made aware by the Police, on 31 July 2025, of the alleged misconduct.
  2. On 14 August 2025, a Labour Officer of the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations & Employment called at the Bank, following a complaint by Mr Rughoobar. The Officer was fully briefed on the matter.
  3. On 15 August 2025, Mr Rughoobar’s counsel wrote to the Bank, requesting for a copy of the letter from the Police and a copy of the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment that had allegedly been breached. He also requested for an extension of time to reply to the Bank’s ‘show cause’ letter.
  4. On 21 August 2025, further to a request from the Labour Office, a meeting was held at the Commission for Conciliation & Mediation. Mr Rughoobar was accompanied by his counsel and his Trade Union representative, Mr Narendranath Gopee. His counsel requested that the disciplinary process to be discontinued against Mr Rughoobar; and if not, to consider his requests dated 15 August 2025. The Bank’s representative declined the request to discontinue the contemplated disciplinary proceedings, but showed his counsel and Mr Gopee the letter from the Police. A next meeting was fixed on 1 September 2025 to report progress.
  5. On 21 August 2025, in the afternoon, the Bank received the true and certified copies of the Weekend Court and the District Court of Grand Port court records, which were being awaited for, in order to enable the Bank to take a decision as to whether Mr Rughoobar should be interdicted or not pending the Police enquiry.
  6. On 25 August 2025, the Bank granted an extension of ten days to Mr Rughoobar, from the date of the letter, to reply to the Bank’s show cause letter, as well as controlled access to the said documents, given their confidential nature. Mr Rughoobar has, to date, still not provided the Bank with the full circumstances, without delay, of the criminal case.
  7. On 25 August 2025, in the afternoon, after having perused the said court records and other relevant documents, the Bank took the decision to interdict Mr Rughoobar, in compliance with paragraph 2.2.48 of Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment, with immediate effect, from the exercise of his functions as analyst, pending the outcome of a Police enquiry into a criminal charge of ‘rogue and vagabond’, for which he has been provisionally charged before the District Court of Grand Port.
  8. It is thus manifest that the Bank’s decision of 25 August 2025 to interdict Mr Rughoobar pending the outcome of a Police enquiry into a criminal charge of ‘rogue and vagabond’, for which he has been provisionally charged before the District Court of Grand Port, was notified to him promptly after the Bank had formally been made aware by the District Court of Grand Port, on 21 August 2025, of the criminal offence allegedly committed by Mr Rughoobar.
  9. For the avoidance of doubt, the Bank wishes to place on record that Mr Rughoobar is currently facing the following disciplinary processes, for which the Bank has adhered strictly to the law, the statutory time limits, and the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment:
  1. contrary to paragraph 2.2.32 of the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment, Mr Rughoobar failed to inform the Bank without delay of the full circumstances of his arrest, detention and provisional charge, which the Bank brought to his attention on 8 August 2025, and has, to date, still not done so; and
  2. in accordance with paragraph 2.2.48 of the Bank’s Terms and Conditions of Employment, Mr Rughoobar has been interdicted from the exercise of his functions, pending the outcome of a Police enquiry into a criminal charge of ‘rogue and vagabond’, for which he has been provisionally charged before the District Court of Grand Port.
Available as :