Shashijit Infraprojects announced that the hearing regarding its property lease dispute with the Vapi Municipal Corporation has been adjourned to October 23, 2026. The matter was scheduled for listing before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat on October 9, 2026, but could not be taken up for hearing.

The company disclosed this update in a filing to the BSE under Regulation 30 of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. The dispute concerns a leased property acquired from the Vapi Municipal Corporation, formerly known as Vapi Nagar Palika. This development follows several earlier disclosures made by the company between February 2024 and September 2026 regarding the same litigation.

Litigation Status Update

The company confirmed that the case remains pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat. As of the date of the disclosure, no adjudication on the merits of the case has been made. The adjournment implies that the legal proceedings will continue without an immediate resolution or verdict in this specific session.

The filing clarified that the disclosure pertains solely to the status change of the proceedings. It did not involve any settlement terms, compensation payments, or penalties at this stage. Consequently, the impact on the financial position of the listed entity remains unquantified in this specific update, as no settlement has occurred.

Disclosure Details

The regulatory filing provided specific details required under SEBI Master Circular No. SEBI/HO/CFD/PoD2/CIR/P/0155 dated January 30, 2026. The key elements of the disclosure are summarized below:

This update highlights the ongoing nature of the legal challenge faced by the infrastructure firm. Investors and stakeholders will await the next hearing date for further clarity on the resolution timeline. The company stated that this information will also be available on its official website.

Shashijit Infraprojects Limited announced that resolutions 1 through 4 were passed at its 19th Annual General Meeting, while resolution 5 regarding the removal of Chairman and Managing Director Ajit Jain was defeated.

The meeting was held on September 30, 2026, via Video Conferencing. The voting results were declared on October 1, 2026, following scrutiny by Nitesh P. Shah. The company had previously filed revised proceedings on October 1, 2026, to correct a digital signature error in the initial submission, replacing the DSC of Ajit Jain with that of Company Secretary Neha Mewara.

Voting Results Summary

The shareholders voted on five items. Ordinary resolutions for financial statement adoption and director reappointment passed unanimously or near-unanimously. Special resolutions for the appointment of two independent directors also passed. The proposed removal of Ajit Jain received minimal support.

Detailed Vote Analysis

Resolution 5, which sought to remove Ajit Jain from the office of Director, was rejected by a significant margin. Out of 32,958,192 votes polled, only 17,116 votes were cast in favor of the removal, representing 0.05% of the total votes. Conversely, 32,941,076 votes were cast against the resolution, accounting for 99.95% of the total votes polled.

The promoter group, holding 27,461,655 shares, voted entirely against the removal. Among public non-institutional shareholders, who held 5,496,537 shares, only 17,116 shares voted in favor, while 5,479,421 voted against.

Meeting Details and Attendance

The 19th AGM commenced at 3:00 pm and concluded at 3:46 pm. Key managerial personnel and directors in attendance included:

The statutory auditors were represented by Vinayak Bafna, Partner at Kakaria and Associates LLP. Nitesh Shah served as the scrutinizer for the e-voting process.

What the Numbers Show

The voting pattern highlights a stark divergence between promoter and minority shareholder sentiment on governance issues. While promoters voted uniformly against the removal of Ajit Jain, a small fraction of public shareholders (approximately 0.31% of public non-institutional votes polled) supported the removal. However, the overwhelming majority of public votes also aligned against the removal, resulting in a consolidated 99.95% opposition to the resolution.