Ashoka Metcast Limited shareholders approved the appointment of Jhanvi Vikas Sethi as an independent director during their annual general meeting on September 17, 2026. The appointment takes effect from August 12, 2026.

The board of directors recommended the move based on advice from the Nomination and Remuneration Committee. Sethi will serve a term of five years, concluding on August 11, 2031. The company confirmed that she is not debarred from holding office by SEBI or any other authority.

Director Profile and Experience

Sethi brings over 20 years of experience in finance and stock markets to the board. Her professional background includes investment management, capital market operations, and financial analysis. She has worked with leading business groups, gaining exposure to various financial matters.

The company stated that her diverse experience enables her to provide strategic guidance and valuable insights. She is 49 years old and holds DIN 08593000.

Other Directorships

Sethi currently holds positions in other listed entities. She serves as an independent director at Rhetan TMT Limited. Additionally, she is an additional independent director at Ashnisha Industries Limited and Gujarat Natural Resources Limited.

She does not hold any committee memberships or chairmanships in these other companies. The filing disclosed no relationships between her and existing directors of Ashoka Metcast.

Regulatory Compliance

The disclosure was made pursuant to Regulation 30 of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. The company referenced SEBI Master Circular HO/49/14/14(7)2025-CFD-POD2/I/3762/2026 dated January 30, 2026. The AGM commenced at 3:30 pm and concluded at 3:37 pm.

Shareholders of Ashoka Metcast rejected five special resolutions concerning material related-party transactions during the company’s annual general meeting held on September 17, 2026. The voting results highlight significant dissent among public non-institutional investors regarding these specific corporate actions.

The AGM, conducted via video conferencing and other audio-visual means, saw the passage of ordinary resolutions for adopting financial statements and reappointing directors. However, the special resolutions seeking approval for transactions with five group entities failed to secure the requisite majority.

Voting Results Overview

The scrutinizer report filed with the BSE and NSE details the voting patterns across nine resolutions. Promoter and promoter group holdings, totaling 13,410,000 shares, voted in favor of all resolutions where they were not interested parties. For resolutions where promoters were interested, they abstained from voting as per regulatory requirements.

Passed Resolutions

Two ordinary resolutions and two special resolutions were passed:

• Adoption of Financial Statements: The standalone and consolidated financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2026, received 100% of valid votes cast in favor. A total of 13,775,858 votes were polled.
• Reappointment of Director: The reappointment of Mr. Shalin Ashok Shah as a Non-Executive Director received 98.86% support, with 13,619,416 votes in favor against 157,047 votes against.
• Regularization of Independent Director: The regularization of Mrs. Jhanvi Vikas Sethi’s appointment as a Non-Executive Independent Director also secured 98.86% approval.
• Financial Assistance Limit Enhancement: The resolution to enhance the limit for availing financial assistance from promoters and converting loans into equity shares passed with 98.86% support.

Failed Resolutions

Five special resolutions regarding material related-party transactions (RPTs) failed to pass. In all five cases, promoter interests were declared, leading to zero votes from the promoter group. The outcome depended entirely on public non-institutional voters, who held 11,586,000 shares.

What the Numbers Show

The voting data reveals a sharp divergence between promoter-aligned outcomes and public investor sentiment. While resolutions without promoter interest passed unanimously or near-unanimously, every resolution involving a related-party transaction faced substantial opposition. Public non-institutional shareholders voted against four of the five RPTs by margins exceeding 40%, indicating clear resistance to these specific corporate relationships despite the promoters' abstention. The identical vote counts for the last four entities suggest coordinated voting behavior among the dissenting block.