Paras Petrofils AGM passes resolutions amid compliance delays
- All AGM resolutions passed with over 99.99% support from promoters
- Secretarial audit flags 92-day delay in appointing Company Secretary
- Company paid ₹1,08,560 fine to BSE and NSE for compliance lapse
- Only 60 shareholders attended AGM, with just two being public investors

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Paras Petrofils Limited passed all resolutions at its 35th Annual General Meeting held on September 29, 2026, despite disclosing significant compliance lapses in its secretarial audit report. The meeting, conducted via Video Conferencing, saw minimal public shareholder participation.
The company filed the AGM proceedings on October 6, 2026, citing a delay caused by the Company Secretary’s medical leave due to dengue. The filing was submitted under Regulation 30 of SEBI (LODR) Regulations, 2015.
Voting outcomes on key resolutions
The first resolution sought to receive, consider, and adopt the Audited Standalone Financial Statements for the financial year ended March 31, 2026. The second resolution concerned the reappointment of Sanjay Jayant Bhatt as a director, replacing himself upon retirement by rotation under Section 152(6) of the Companies Act, 2013. Both resolutions were passed with overwhelming support from the promoter group.
| Resolution | Total Votes Polled | Votes in Favour | Votes Against | % In Favour |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adoption of Financial Statements | 79,831,477 | 79,830,477 | 1,000 | 99.998747% |
| Reappointment of Director | 79,831,477 | 79,829,472 | 2,005 | 99.997488% |
Shareholder participation trends
Data from the filing highlights a significant disparity in participation between promoter and public shareholders. Out of 92,245 shareholders on record as of September 18, 2026, only 60 individuals attended via Video Conferencing. Of these, 58 were from the Promoter and Promoter Group, while only two were public shareholders.
In terms of voting power, the Promoter and Promoter Group held 134,461,990 shares but cast votes representing 79,787,400 shares. Public non-institutional shareholders, holding 199,759,010 shares, cast votes for only 44,077 shares. This indicates that public shareholder engagement remained extremely low relative to their shareholding base.
Secretarial audit observations
The Secretarial Audit Report for FY26 highlighted two major compliance violations. The company delayed the appointment of a qualified Company Secretary as Compliance Officer by 92 days, violating Regulation 6(1) of SEBI (LODR) Regulations, 2015. Consequently, Paras Petrofils paid a fine of ₹1,08,560 each imposed by BSE Limited and NSE Limited.
Additionally, the company failed to file Form MGT-14 regarding a Board resolution for granting loans to other body corporates, as required under Section 179(3)(f) read with Section 117 of the Companies Act, 2013. The company acknowledged these observations and stated it would strengthen internal systems to avoid future non-compliance.
What the Numbers Show
The voting data reveals a near-total absence of institutional investor presence, with zero votes polled by Public Institutions across both resolutions. Furthermore, the divergence in dissent is notable: while only one member voted against the adoption of financial statements (1,000 votes), two members voted against the director’s reappointment (2,005 votes). Despite this slight increase in dissent for the directorial appointment, the total votes against remained negligible at less than 0.01% of the total votes polled, underscoring the dominance of promoter control in corporate governance decisions.
Historical Stock Returns for Paras Petrofils
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -1.01% | -4.37% | -7.94% | -15.09% | -12.05% | +31.33% |
How will the disclosed secretarial audit violations impact Paras Petrofils' ability to secure future debt financing or institutional investment?
What specific internal control mechanisms will management implement to prevent further delays in statutory filings and compliance officer appointments?
Could the extreme lack of public shareholder participation trigger regulatory scrutiny regarding the company's investor relations practices?


































