1. INTRODUCTION Background 1.1
At present there are 1064 clearing houses in the country and they have been functioning
as per the model Uniform Regulations and Rules for Clearing Houses (URRBCH). The
URRBCH is not statutory, but the banks within a particular jurisdiction join together
to constitute a clearing house and unanimously adopt a resolution to adhere to
the URRBCH. The URRBCH has several provisions including the criteria for
membership and a provision for the member to sponsor a bank as sub-member. Electronic
Clearing Service (ECS) – an electronic payment system for direct credit
/ direct debit to bank accounts which is operational at 64 centres is also localized
in character and rides on the clearing house infrastructure. The members of the
local clearing houses at these 64 centres are also members of ECS system. 1.2
Apart from these localized clearing house system, there are a few all India electronic
payment systems where membership entitles the participant to operate on an all-India
basis. Three main payment systems are Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) system,
National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT) System and Negotiated Dealing System
(NDS). Membership to these payment systems is based on the provisions in
the Procedural Guidelines / Regulations of these payment systems. 1.3 In
view of the rapidly evolving payment systems and emerging systemic risks due to
probable failure of financially weak members it has become necessary to put in
place appropriate eligibility criteria. Usually, prescription of appropriate access
criteria to the payment systems would substantially reduce risks to the system.
Therefore, Governor, Reserve Bank of India, in his Annual Policy Statement for
the year 2007-08 had proposed preparation of comprehensive guidelines setting
out minimum eligibility criteria to become members of the clearing houses/payment
systems. 1.4 Accordingly a Working Group was constituted with members as
under to prepare the draft Guidelines : S/Shri. R.Gandhi, Regional
Director, Hyderabad Chairman G.Srinivasan,
CGM, RPCD Member
A.N.Rao, Regional Director, Mumbai
Member G.Padmanabhan, CGM-in-Charge, DIT, CO Member
N.S.Vishwanathan, CGM-I-C, UBD, CO
Member Dr. N. Krishna Mohan, Director IDRBT
Member B.Srinivas, Regional Director, Ahmedabad Member
A.P.Hota, CGM, DPSS Member-Secretary (
Shri Kaza Sudhakar, CGM, Customer Services Department joined the Working Group
as a Special Invitee) Methodology and approach adopted by the group: 1.5
The Group had three sittings at Mumbai. The Group had also discussions with the
senior officials of State Bank of India that manages over 650 clearing houses
in the country and two cooperative institutions viz. Maharashtra State Cooperative
Bank Ltd and Mumbai District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Both these cooperative
banks are important constituents of Brihanmumbai Bankers' Clearing House servicing
nearly 100 urban co-operative banks as their sub-members. The Group also had extensive
interaction on some of the existing practices with the Clearing House Division
of the Department of Payment and Settlement System. 1.6 The Group places
on record contribution made by Shri K.N.Krishnamurthy, General Manager, Smt. Mitali
Gupta Shaikh, Asst. General Manager and Shri Sudhanidhi Chakrapani, Manager in
providing secretarial support. 2. MEMBERSHIP
CRITERIA – CURRENT STATUS Membership of Paper based
Clearing Houses 2.1 At present there are 59 MICR based
cheque processing centres in the country in addition to the 1005 non-MICR clearing
houses which manage the processing of the paper based instruments. Of the total
cheques processed in the country, over 82% by volume and 88% by value are accounted
for by the 59 MICR centres. 2.2 The URRBCH prescribes that a bank
should be licensed for being admitted to the clearing house. This requirement
is applied on the following lines: a. Public sector banks, Private sector
banks opened after January 2004 and foreign banks are eligible for membership
based on application. b. Applications of other banks need to be cleared
by the concerned regulatory department c. The co-operative banks need
the recommendation of the State Co-operative Bank, while the State Cooperative
bank would get automatic membership After the URRBCH came into vogue and
got adopted by the different clearing houses in the country, the member banks
were permitted to continue their membership of the clearing house . In addition
to the license, the member banks should also maintain a settlement account with
the concerned settlement bank and be covered by the DICGC. 2.3 URRBCH also
provides for an annual review of the membership of the banks based on the analysis
of the clearing data (volume of presentation, Returns versus Presentations / Drawings,
settlement account analysis etc.) as well as inputs, if any, on the financial
position of a member bank received from the concerned regulatory department of
Reserve Bank of India. A member can be re-categorised as a sub-member as
a result of such a review provided he satisfies the rules for becoming a sub-member.
Membership position of all banks would be reviewed by the President once
a year and selectively as and when required. 2.4 The existing provisions
do not cover the risk sensitivity of the banks participating in the clearing
operations. It is, however, important to observe that, in our country, there have
not been major failures on account of non-existence of such provisions. A few,
which occurred were more on account of certain imprudent credit decisions taken
by the banks, rather than any major lacuna in clearing and settlement mechanism. 2.5
The members who facilitate the settlement for sub-members normally impose certain
restrictions like maintaining the stipulated balances, or presentations on them
with in the stipulated balance, etc. The member banks may also provide incentives
to their sub-members like intra-day credit facilities with or without collateral.
Pricing criteria for access to payment systems is another determinant for deciding
the size of those who have direct access to the system. In case the charges (i.e.
fixed, variable or annual) are very high it may not be economical for banks/ financial
institutions who handle smaller volumes of transactions to directly access the
concerned payment systems and these entities may find it more profitable to access
the systems through larger entities that have direct access. Membership
to Electronic Payment Systems 2.6 The membership criteria to
electronic payment systems like RTGS, NEFT, NDS and ECS are not uniform. Membership
to ECS system is based on membership to paper based clearing. Therefore access
to ECS system is localized in character and is not based on risk perception. RTGS,
NEFT and NDS are all India payment systems. RTGS is open for scheduled banks,
non-banks like primary dealers, clearing organizations and all India financial
institutions. The number of RTGS members at present is only 97 banks and 10 primary
dealers. Approval has been granted for membership to two all India financial institutions
– DICGC and EXIM Bank – but they are yet to participate in RTGS. Access
to NEFT system is dependent on RTGS membership. NEFT membership is open only to
RTGS member banks. 3. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
3.1 Risks in the various clearing/payment systems
3.1.1 Settlement risk The settlement risk refers
to the risk arising on account of the participating member not being able to meet
the net clearing obligations. In the existing cheque clearing system and
NEFT there is no specific exposure limit prescribed either by the clearing house
or the settlement bank to the individual participants for claims on them nor does
any net-debit-cap exist. As a result the net debit for a member is a variable
figure and in exigencies could prove to be beyond the ability of the individual
member to meet, if its liquidity management system is poor or there are
any strains faced by that entity in its operations due to some other risks faced
by it, like credit risk. In the past, the major risk of settlements faced by banks
has been only due to certain imprudent credit decisions relating to the operations
in the financial market by themselves or their constituents and the customer obligations/presentations
have in the past not posed such a grave threat to the settlement mechanism. No
doubt a Committee (Chairman: R.Gandhi) in the past had examined
the issue of providing or creating a settlement guarantee fund mechanism, but
such a fund could not fructify till now. In these circumstances, the Group is
of the view that tightening the entry norms would be a practical approach.
3.1.2 Systemic risk Systemic risk arises on
account of the impact of failure to meet the obligations of one participant in
the system on other participants. This would be substantial, if the affected participant
were to have large transactions with all the system wide participants and is likely
to be marginal in the case of smaller participants with small number of transactions.
In the Indian context, such instances have so far not been faced by banking sector.
However, occurrence of such an event cannot be totally ruled out in future. The
Group was of the view that the practice of a large number of cooperative banks
becoming sub-members through a single bank has systemic implications. Any deterioration
in the financial performance of such a sponsor bank would have adverse impact
on the sub-members sponsored by it. Therefore, from systemic angle, it would be
advisable to limit the number of sub-member banks a sponsor bank can handle. Simultaneously,
it has to be ensured that the limit so stipulated does not affect the sub-members
adversely and increase the cost of operation to an abnormally high level. 3.1.3
Operational risk Operational risk is still an evolving concept
in Indian banks and is yet to be fully evaluated by the system. Although guidelines
have been issued by Reserve Bank of India, much headway has not been made
by banks. To start with, Reserve Bank of India has advised the scheduled Commercial
banks to adopt the basic Indicator approach for measuring the impact of operational
risk. It would be advisable for banks to put in place systems to measure the impact
of operational risk in clearing operations area, particularly in the large value
segments namely, securities dealing and settlements, derivative segment as also
forex segments and RTGS to ensure that the risks are adequately identified, measured,
monitored and provided for. Operational risk could also arise on account of computer
systems and their non-availability. Banks have been advised to ensure that adequate
redundancy is created to ensure their continued participation in the clearing
and settlement operations. 3.1.4 Legal risk
Legal risks arise on account of inadequacies in the statutory provisions
or the deficiencies in the legal framework. The provisions of IT Act have been
reviewed with the continued dependence of banks on IT infrastructure for their
business needs. However, the regulations and rules covering clearing and funds
transfer operations have not been put on sound legal footing. The Payment Systems
Bill is still to be put on statutory footing and there is no specific law covering
the netting that is being carried out in the various clearing and settlement systems.
The soundness of the practices has also not been subjected to adequate testing
by way of court judgments and the risk carried by banks cannot be appropriately
quantified as at present. However, banks may be cautioned to ensure compliance
with the existing provisions of IT Act, as well as other legal provisions like
Anti money laundering legislation, etc. They should also take steps to measure
the impact of non-compliance of such statutory requirements and as on date no
published or unpublished data is available to assess the extent of risk to which
banks are exposed to in this regard. 3.2 Other issues
3.2.1 “Big” and “small” The
size of a participant in a payment system used to be a determining factor for
providing direct access. The issue that always receives much attention in this
regard is whether a big institution can fail and create problems/risks to the
other participating institutions. In fact the core principles enunciated by BIS
clearly states that the concept 'Too big to fail' is no longer relevant.
BIS has suggested that the settlement system should take into account the possible
failure of two largest players, as a measure of risk. 3.2.2 Strong
banks and weak banks The financial health of the banks also has
a bearing on the extent to which they impact payment systems. Typically, the banks
with weak financial health such as low capital, low profitability, and frequent
liquidity problems pose a risk to smooth functioning of the payment systems. It
is observed that several co-operative banks and Regional Rural Banks, which are
known to be weak, are having direct access to some major clearing houses. 3.2.3
Commercial banks and Cooperative banks It is a generally
accepted principle that better regulated entities pose lesser risk to the payment
systems. Commercial banks in India (other than Regional Rural Banks) are relatively
large and the prudential regulations applied to them are relatively more stringent
than applicable for other types of banks. Further, the legislative framework that
govern the regulation and supervision of Commercial and cooperative banks is not
uniform, the latter being subject to dual control. 3.2.4 Licensed
and unlicensed banks The URRBCH was adopted by the Clearing
houses in the country in 1986. Although as per URRBCH the banks are required to
be licensed for being eligible for membership, the clearing houses ignored this
provision at that time and the then unlicensed banks continued as members. Further,
the legal provisions permit an unlicensed bank to continue its business till such
time the Reserve Bank of India has refused it a license in writing. As on date,
there are no commercial banks, which are part of the clearing system without a
license, but there are a large number of cooperative banks, including several
state cooperative banks and district central cooperative banks which do not have
a valid licence. At the same time their applications for a license have also not
been refused by the Reserve Bank in writing. It is in these circumstances
that these banks have been continuing as a part of the payment system. 3.2.5
Scheduled banks and non-scheduled banks Presently, scheduled
status has been prescribed as the eligibility criteria for access to RTGS and
NEFT, whereas it is not compulsory for access to cheque clearing system. Notifying
a bank as a scheduled bank entails certain benefits to it, in addition to certain
obligations on its functioning. While such scheduled status may be a comforting
factor in some respect for those dealing with such an institution, it is the financial
strength of an institution which is of critical importance in the context of risk
management. 3.2.6 Foreign banks and Indian banks
The present guidelines provide for membership of foreign banks to all clearing
houses irrespective of its international size or risk management capability, while
prescribing restrictions on the domestic commercial and cooperative banks, other
than PSBs and State Cooperative banks. The Group is of the view, that in keeping
with the basic move towards providing a level playing field, the differential
treatment given to foreign banks needs a review. 3.2.7 Metro/Urban
and Rural centres At present there are no separate criteria
for entry norms at metro/urban centres vis-à-vis other centres. But an
analysis of the cheque clearing data reveals that MICR Clearing centres ( 59 centres
as on 31st May 2007) account for 82% by volume of instruments and
88% by value of transactions of the total cheques that get cleared through all
the clearing houses in the country. The present approach of uniform access criteria
for clearing houses at all centres needs a review without losing sight of its
impact on customer service particularly at smaller centres. 3.2.8
Members and sub-members A member of a clearing house maintains
a separate settlement a/c with the bank managing the clearing house. A sub-member
maintains a settlement a/c with a member and the transactions of the sub-member
get reflected in the member's settlement a/c. At large centres with a large number
of banks participating in clearing, the clearing house may not be in a position
to monitor the operations of every member closely. Thus if a weak member were
to participate as a sub-member of another member, the operations are likely to
be more closely monitored and the risk would be isolated at the level of the member
itself. But a member sponsoring too many sub-members would also result in concentration
of risk. Therefore, there has to be an appropriate balance. 4.
RECOMMENDATIONS A. Access Criteria for Membership
to Clearing Houses for Cheque Clearing 4.1
Payment services are fundamental to economic activity. Entities, who
offer payment services to their constituents, need access to Payment systems.
In order to ensure the safety, security and integrity of payment services, access
to payment system should ordinarily be restricted to entities regulated by the
central bank 4.2 Section 49A of BR Act empowers Central
Government to notify institutions to accept deposits withdrawable by cheques.
Post Office Savings Bank falls under such specific notification issued by Central
Government. Such notified institutions are providing chequeable accounts to their
constituents. In order to facilitate better customer service such notified institutions
should also have access to the clearing system. 4.3 Ordinarily,
only licensed entities are allowed to access Payment System as members of the
clearing houses. The BR Act permits certain entities, whose applications for license
have not yet been refused in writing by the Reserve Bank, to continue to do banking
business including payment services. However, such banks do pose risks to
the financial system and may need closer monitoring. Therefore, the Group recommends
that such unlicensed banks may be permitted access to payment systems only as
sub-members. However, exemption may be made for the unlicensed State Co-operative
banks/District Central Cooperative banks because of their special position in
the co-operative banking sector. 4.4 The clearing operations
at the clearing houses at MICR centres are typically large both in terms of volume
of instruments and value of transactions. Thus, the systemic risk posed to the
system by such operations is greater in the MICR centres, than from the clearing
services rendered at non-MICR centres, which are comparatively smaller centres.
Therefore, there is a need to apply more stringent access norms at the MICR centres
for membership to clearing houses. It is imperative that only financially sound
entities are permitted as members at these MICR centres. 4.4.1
Therefore, The Group recommends that the membership to clearing houses at
the MICR centres be confined to licensed banks meeting the following financial
criteria: (i) CRAR 9% (ii) Net NPA of less than 10 %
(iii) No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year;
and (iv) Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years. Further,
All members would be required to abide by the guidelines issued by the clearing
houses on the technical specifications and infrastructure requirements Provided
that: a. State cooperative banks may be permitted
to be members without reference to the above criteria in view of their special
status in the system. b. District Central Cooperative
Banks (DCCBs) having networth of Rs.10 crore and a record of maintaining CRR and
SLR without default for last one year may be extended direct membership of clearing
house at MICR centres c. DCCBs not satisfying the criteria
at (b) above may also be permitted membership of the clearing houses at MICR centres
where the State Cooperative bank is not a member of that clearing house
d. RRBs may also be permitted to be members of the clearing
houses at the MICR centres, keeping in view their special status in the system,
subject to their having positive net-worth and not defaulting in maintenance of
CRR and SLR during the past one year. 4.4.2 Application
of these criteria on the banks category-wise is furnished in the Annex. 4.5
Entities which are presently members of Clearing Houses at the MICR
centres, but ineligible to be member as per the proposed access criteria in paragraph
4.4 would have to conform to the prescribed norms within one year failing
which membership would be downgraded to that of a sub-member. Such banks should,
however, be barred with immediate effect, (subject to the minimum time required
for alternate arrangements), from sponsoring any sub-members. 4.6
At present there is no limit on the number of banks which a member can sponsor
as sub-members. There are instances of some banks sponsoring as many as 50 sub-members.
This creates concentration of risk, thus paving way for systemic risk, in case
of a crisis. Therefore, the Group is of the view that there is a need to limit
the number of sub-members a member can sponsor. The Group recommends that a member
can ordinarily sponsor a maximum of only 10 banks as sub-members. Reserve Bank
may permit exceptions based on its evaluation of risk management practices of
the sponsoring member. 4.7 At present the cooperative
banks are permitted to maintain their SLR assets in the form of term deposits
with higher cooperative institutions viz. DCCBs and State Cooperative banks. Since
the DCCBs and State Cooperative banks have been sponsoring a large number of banks
as sub-members at several MICR centres and implementation of the recommendation
made at paragraph 4.6 may force many urban co-operative banks to change sponsorship
arrangements from State Co-operative banks and District Central co-operative banks
to other banks, leaving such banks with an increased liquidity requirement. The
Group recommends that appropriate exception may be provided in maintenance of
SLR assets in terms of section 24A of the BR Act (AACS). 4.8
Entities which are presently conforming to the prescribed norms but face a slippage
at a later date will be downgraded to a sub-member. Its membership will be reconsidered
after one year. 4.9 In order
to facilitate better functioning of the clearing houses it is suggested that the
types of sub-members could be widened as follows : Sub-Membership in
the clearing houses at MICR centres can be one of the two types:
- Sub-membership Type-1 : where the sub member submits the cheques or receives
the cheques through its member and the accounting thereof is also done through
the member
- Sub-Membership Type-2 : Where the sub-member
submits the cheques or receives the cheques directly to/ from the clearing house,
but accounting is done only through the member
4.10
The continuance of the membership will be primarily based on the continuing ability
of the member to meet its clearing obligations in time. All the current provisions
in URRBCH relating to continuance/ termination of membership will continue. 4.11
For the MICR Clearing centres, the Uniform Regulations and Rules for
Clearing Houses (URRBCH) may be modified and released for adoption by the clearing
houses at MICR centres under the name “Regulations and Rules for MICR based
Clearing Houses” 4.12 The existing arrangements
for access to clearing houses at centres other than the MICR centres may continue,
subject to the conditions indicated at paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 above. B
RTGS Membership 4.13 RTGS is
a systemically important payment system primarily aimed at large value transactions.
Smooth operation of RTGS requires technological infrastructure of sophisticated
nature with adequate contingency capability. Best value for RTGS membership is
achieved only if the participant has adequate number of time critical transactions
and organizes liquidity for the same. Presently direct access to RTGS (viz. membership
type A, B, D and E) is open only to scheduled banks, primary dealers and clearing
organizations. There is also an enabling provision for Reserve Bank to permit
other institutions for grant of direct access. The Group deliberated on
the need for opening of the RTGS membership to a larger group of banks and “other
institutions”. Considering that a large number of co-operative banks
with wide network of branches and good financial standing are ineligible for direct
access, it was felt that customers of such entities should also be able to avail
RTGS services. Besides, the State Co-operative Banks which provide financial services
to a bulk of the banks in co-operative sector, a special status may be granted
to State-Cooperative banks. Keeping these factors in view, the Group has recommended
the following eligibility criteria for direct access to RTGS system through membership
Type A: a) CRAR 9% b) Net NPA of less than 10 % c) Minimum net-worth
of Rs.50 crore d) No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past
one year; and e) Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years. Criteria
of INFINET membership and technological infrastructure would continue as additional
requirements. Provided that: a. The State Co-operative banks
and all District Central Cooperative banks, may be permitted Type A membership
to RTGS subject to their having a minimum net-worth of Rs.50 crore and not
having any default in CRR and SLR maintenance during the past one year. b.
The RRBs may also be granted RTGS membership Type A subject to their not defaulting
in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year and having a minimum net-worth
of Rs.50 crore C. NEFT Membership 4.14
NEFT membership may continue to be linked with RTGS. The list of NEFT
members would be a sub-set of the list of RTGS members except that Post Office
Savings Bank (POSB) can also be a member of NEFT system. NEFT membership
to POSB would be required for setting up of a nation-wide remittance system which
may include the branches of Post Office Savings Bank. Non-bank entities (other
than POSB) will not be a part of NEFT system. D. Membership
of INFINET 4.15 INFINET is only a carrier
and not a payment system. As such the group viewed that the only criterion for
being a member of INFINET would be: - A licensed bank or
a financial institution (including primary dealer) or research/ training / information
technology organization fully owned by Reserve Bank or banks or a bank
- possession of the requisite infrastructure for participation
Annex Criteria
for access to payment systems
Sl
No. | Category
of banks | Whether
to have access to Clearing Houses for Cheque Clearing at 59 large centres ( share
: 82 % of volume and 88 % of value) | RTGS/NEFT |
1 | Scheduled
commercial banks ( excluding RRBs and Local Area Banks) | Membership
subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net NPA of less than 10 %
- No
default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year; and
- Net
profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
| Type-A
Membership of RTGS and NEFT subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net
NPA of less than 10 %
- No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during
the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
- Minimum
net-worth of Rs.50 crore
| 2 | State
Co-operative Banks | Member
| Type A Member of
RTGS and NEFT, subject to - No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR
during the past one year
- Minimum net-worth of Rs.50 crore
|
3 | District
Central Co-op. Banks | Membership
at the clearing house where the concerned State Co-op bank is a member if
- Minimum net-worth of Rs 10 Crore.
- No default
in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
Membership
at all other centres | Type
A membership of RTGS and NEFT subject to - No default in
maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
- Minimum networth of
Rs.50 crore
| 4 | Regional
Rural Banks | Membership
subject to - positive net-worth
- No default in maintenance
of CRR and SLR during the past one year
| Type
A Membership if RTGS and NEFT subject to - No default in
maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
- Minimum net-worth
of Rs.50 crore
| 5 | Local
Area Banks | Membership
subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net NPA of less than 10 %
- No
default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
| Type-A
Membership of RTGS and NEFT subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net
NPA of less than 10 %
- No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during
the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
- Minimum
net-worth of Rs.50 crore
| 6 | Scheduled
Urban co-operative banks | Membership
subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net NPA of less than 10 %
- No
default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
| Type-A
Member of RTGS and NEFT subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net
NPA of less than 10 %
- No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during
the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
- Minimum
net-worth of Rs.50 crore
| 7 | Non-Scheduled
Urban co-operative Banks | Membership
subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net NPA of less than 10 %
- No
default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
| Type-A
Member of RTGS and NEFT subject to - CRAR 9%
- Net
NPA of less than 10 %
- No default in maintenance of CRR and SLR during
the past one year
- Net profit in at least one of the preceding two years.
- Minimum
net-worth of Rs.50 crore
| 8 | Banks
in category 1, and 3-7 not complying with the requirements | Sub-membership
through a member | No
access | 9 | Unlicensed
banks ( other than unlicensed state Co-operative banks and District central co-op
banks) | Sub- membership
through a member | No
access | 10 | Post
Office Savings Bank | Member
( only to GPO or Head Post Office with POSB Branch) | Access
to NEFT | Notes I. Entities
which are presently members of Clearing House at the MICR centres , but ineligible
to be member as per the proposed access criteria would have to conform to the
prescribed norms within one year failing which membership would be downgraded
from member to sub-member. Such banks should, however, be barred with immediate
effect, (subject to the minimum time required for alternate arrangements), from
sponsoring any other entity as a sub-member. II. Entities which are presently
conforming to the prescribed norms but face a slippage at a later date will be
down graded to sub-membership immediately. Up-gradation will be considered after
one year. III. Entities not regulated by Reserve Bank other than specifically
indicated above in the matrix of access criteria shall not have any access to
any payment system. Any such existing member of a clearinghouse, whether in a
MICR centre or otherwise, shall be immediately debarred. IV. Sub-Membership
in the clearing house at MICR centres can be one of the two types as per
the arrangement that the sub-member would have with its Member and the clearing
house: a. Sub-membership Type-1 : where the sub member submits the cheques
or receives the cheques through its member and the accounting thereof is also
done through the member b. Sub-Membership Type-2 : Where the sub- member
submits the cheques or receives the cheques directly to / from the clearing
house, but accounting is done only through the member ; and v. To
contain the risk of members having too many sub members, no member can ordinarily
have more than 10 sub-members. Reserve Bank may permit exceptions based on its
evaluation of risk management practices of the members. VI. For the MICR
Clearing centres , the Uniform Regulations and Rules for Clearing Houses (URRBCH)
would be modified and released for adoption by the clearing houses at MICR centres
under the name “ Regulations and Rules for MICR based Clearing Houses”
VII. Entities not eligible to have direct access to payment systems
either as member or sub-member would have to exit from payment systems all centres
( MICR Clearing centres and other centres) with immediate effect.
VIII. Existing arrangements would continue for clearing houses at centres other
than the MICR Clearing centers subject to Note III above which states that
any entity not regulated by RBI other than specifically indicated above in the
matrix of access criteria shall be immediately debarred from membership to payment
systems. Glossary URRBCH
: Uniform Rules and Regulations for Bankers Clearing Houses RTGS
: Real Time Gross Settlement System NEFT
: National Electronic Funds Transfer MICR
: Magnetic Ink Character Recognition DICGC :
Deposit and Credit Guarantee Corporation NDS
: Negotiated Dealing System CRAR
: Capital Risk Asset Ratio NPA
: Non-performing Asset CRR
: Cash Reserve Ration SLR
: Statutory Liquidity Ratio DCCB
: District Central Cooperative Banks RRB
: Regional Rural banks Type A member : RBI, All Scheduled banks, including
Scheduled Co-operative Banks Type B member : Primary dealers Type
C member : Scheduled Banks and Primary Dealers, participating in Call
money Operations, availing of RTGS services through either a Type ‘A’
member or RBI Type D member : Clearing Houses and Clearing
Agencies Type E member : Non-scheduled banks and other financial institutions INFINET
: Indian Financial Network POSB
: Post office savings bank |