Complete non-attendance might not by itself automatically trigger removal; it raises red flags on director diligence and oversight.
NEW DELHI (India CSR): In a surprising development, Gopinath Sahu — a senior leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Odisha — has been appointed as an Independent Director of the central‐PSU ITI Limited with effect from 14 July 2025. However, disclosures show that he has not attended any Board meetings in the 2024-2025 period, raising questions over governance compliance.
During the year under review, eight Meetings of the Board of Directors were held.
Key Facts
| Particulars | Details |
|---|---|
| Name | Gopinath Sahu |
| Position | Independent Director, ITI Limited |
| Date of Appointment | 14 July 2025 |
| Number of Board Meetings Attended (FY 2024-25) | 0 |
| Other Directorships (as on 31 March 2025) | Nil |
| Committee Memberships/Chairmanships (as on 31 March 2025) | Nil |
| Shareholding in ITI Limited | Nil |
| Educational Qualification | M.A. (Odia Language & Literature), LLB – Utkal University |
| Background | Long-time socio-political activist; associated with RSS and BJP in Odisha |
| Political Role | Heads the Communication & Data Division of BJP Odisha; key strategist in 2019 & 2024 elections |
What is the purpose of an Independent Director?
The role of an Independent Director (ID) under Indian corporate law and regulation is quite significant:
- Under Companies Act, 2013, an independent director is defined (Section 149(6)) as a director other than a managing/wholetime/nominee director who is of integrity and possesses relevant expertise and experience, and who does not have certain relationships with the company.
- The objective is to bring an independent judgment to the Board’s deliberations, especially on strategy, performance, risk management, key appointments and standards of conduct.
- Independent directors act as a “watchdog” to enhance corporate credibility and governance standards, helping protect stakeholder interests (especially minority shareholders) and ensuring transparency, accountability.
- Under the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (“LODR”), additional duties for listed entities include independent directors holding at least one meeting of the IDs alone in a financial year to review performance of non‐IDs, the board, and the flow of information from management.
- Other general duties: attend Board and committee meetings, be well informed about the company and external environment, report concerns about unethical behaviour, exercise objective judgment, not be part of management.
***
Is the non-attendance a violation of corporate governance/law?
The fact that an Independent Director has attended zero Board meetings during a financial year raises strong questions of governance and potentially statutory compliance. Relevant legal/regulatory aspects:
- Under Section 173 of the Companies Act, 2013, every company is required to hold a minimum of four Board meetings in a year, with the interval between two meetings not exceeding 120 days.
- Section 174 deals with quorum for Board meetings (one‐third of total strength or two directors, whichever higher) when meetings are held.
- Under the LODR Regulation 25 (for listed entities), independent directors must hold one separate meeting annually and “all the independent directors shall strive to be present at such meeting”.
- In the “Guidance Note on Meetings of the Board of Directors” (ICSI), it is noted that though a director’s absence from one or more meetings may be justified, non-attendance overall is to be viewed with concern.
- Complete non-attendance might not by itself automatically trigger removal; it raises red flags on director diligence and oversight.
Interpretation
- If the Board and its committees met multiple times in the relevant period (which, for a PSU listed entity, is almost certain), then an Independent Director attending zero meetings would effectively not be performing one of the core functions of the role—providing oversight, independent judgment and contributing to deliberations.
- This raises a question of duty of care and due diligence under Section 166 of the Act (directors must act with due and reasonable care, skill and diligence).
- From a governance perspective, the appointment of an Independent Director who does not participate in Board meetings undermines the purpose of the institution of IDs and may weaken stakeholder confidence.
- While mere non‐attendance may not automatically trigger regulatory sanction unless there is a specific violation (e.g., failure to hold required Board meetings or to constitute committees as required), it may be considered poor governance practice and could attract scrutiny from regulators or shareholders.
Key Learning
The appointment of a politically prominent leader as Independent Director of ITI Limited is itself not necessarily objectionable — the law allows independent directors from varied backgrounds. However, the fact that he reportedly attended no Board meetings in the 2024-25 period is troubling from a corporate governance standpoint. The role of an independent director is premised on active participation, oversight and independent judgment. His absence from any meetings suggests a major deviation from the spirit (and arguably the substance) of his role.
(India CSR)
