In Public Sector Undertakings (“PSUs”), delayed filings, missed disclosures, or
non-compliance with listing regulations are not abstract regulatory issues; they have a tangible cost. Unlike private companies, where fines may impact shareholders, in PSUs, these penalties are ultimately borne out of public money, including government investment, minority shareholders, and taxpayers.

Procedural delays, whether in filing financial statements or constituting committees, often result in penalties. Over time, these repeated payments are more than accounting entries. They actually represent resources diverted from operational requirements to regulatory costs.

Boards in PSUs face a dual responsibility: ensure compliance and protect public funds, while growing business. Vigilant monitoring, proactive escalation of pending filings, and integrating compliance timelines into board agendas are not just regulatory duties — they are acts of fiduciary responsibility.

The larger reflection: can governance in PSUs truly be considered effective if compliance delays are tolerated because they “fall under administrative control of the concerned Ministry”? Or should the Board treat every delay as a call to reinforce oversight, accountability, and process efficiency?

When public funds are involved, even procedural delays deserve closer attention — because accountability is part of public trust.

The 5th Annual Corporate Governance Survey, covering the Maharatna and the Navratna companies, brought out by Excellence Enablers Private Limited, indicated that 95% and 97% of the companies had non-compliances indicated in their Secretarial Audit and Secretarial Compliance reports respectively. 

Explore corporate governance practices being followed by Maharatna and Navratna companies in our 5th Edition of Corporate Governance Survey.

Mahima Chopra