| PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 134 (3) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS OF THE SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS), REGULATIONS, 2015, THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AND CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMPANY AFTER CONSIDERING THE VIEWS OF THE EXECUTIVE AND NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS, THE BOARD AS A WHOLE AND ASSESSED THE QUALITY, QUANTITY AND TIMELINESS OF FLOW OF INFORMATION BETWEEN THE COMPANY’S MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD. THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF EVERY DIRECTOR . THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ADOPTED A FORMAL MECHANISM FOR THE EVALUATION OF ITS PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS THAT OF ITS COMMITTEES AND INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS, INCLUDING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WERE REGULARLY UPDATED ON THE INDUSTRY AND MARKET TRENDS, PLANT PROCESSES AND THE OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE OF THE COMPANY THROUGH PRESENTATIONS . |
| PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 134 (3) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS OF THE SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS), REGULATIONS, 2015, THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF THE NON- INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AND CHAIRMAN OF THE COMPANY AFTER CONSIDERING THE VIEWS OF THE EXECUTIVE AND NON- EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE BOARD AS A WHOLE. THEY ASSESSED THE QUALITY, QUANTITY, AND TIMELINESS OF FLOW OF INFORMATION BETWEEN THE COMPANY’S MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD. THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF EVERY DIRECTOR. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ADOPTED A FORMAL MECHANISM FOR THE EVALUATION OF ITS PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS THAT OF ITS COMMITTEES AND INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS, INCLUDING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. |
| IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS & DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS, 2015, THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION WAS CARRIED OUT AS UNDER: BOARD: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA SUGGESTED BY THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF THE BOARD, HAVING REGARD TO VARIOUS CRITERIA SUCH AS BOARD COMPOSITION, BOARD PROCESSES, BOARD DYNAMICS ETC. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT PERFORMANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS A WHOLE WAS SATISFACTORY. COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD: THE PERFORMANCE OF AUDIT COMMITTEE, CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEE, NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE AND STAKEHOLDERS RELATIONSHIP COMMITTEE WAS EVALUATED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY HAVING REGARD TO VARIOUS CRITERIA SUCH AS COMMITTEE COMPOSITION, COMMITTEE PROCESSES, COMMITTEE DYNAMICS, PRESENCE OF MEMBERS, NO. OF MEETINGS HELD ETC. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT ALL THE COMMITTEES WERE PERFORMING THEIR FUNCTIONS SATISFACTORILY AND ACCORDING TO THE MANDATE PRESCRIBED BY THE BOARD UNDER THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, THE RULES FRAMED THEREUNDER AND SEBI (LODR) REGULATIONS, 2015 INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS: (A) INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA SUGGESTED BY THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE, THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR WAS EVALUATED BY THE ENTIRE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (EXCLUDING THE DIRECTOR BEING EVALUATED) ON BROAD PARAMETERS LIKE ENGAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP, ANALYSIS, DECISION MAKING, COMMUNICATION, GOVERNANCE AND INTEREST OF STAKEHOLDERS. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR WAS A REPUTED PROFESSIONAL AND BROUGHT HIS/HER RICH EXPERIENCE TO THE DELIBERATIONS OF THE BOARD. THE BOARD ALSO APPRECIATED THE CONTRIBUTION MADE BY ALL INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS IN GUIDING THE MANAGEMENT FOR ACHIEVING GROWTH AND CONTINUANCE OF EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR ON THE BOARD WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE COMPANY. (B) NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS: THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS EVALUATED BY THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AT THEIR SEPARATE MEETING HELD ON 3RD MARCH, 2021 WHEREIN ALL THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WERE PRESENT. FURTHER, THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS ALSO EVALUATED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THE VARIOUS CRITERIA CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVALUATION INCLUDED LEADERSHIP, ENGAGEMENT, TRANSPARENCY, ANALYSIS, DECISION MAKING, FUNCTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, GOVERNANCE AND INTEREST OF STAKEHOLDERS. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT EACH OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS PROVIDING GOOD BUSINESS AND PEOPLE LEADERSHIP. |
| IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS & DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS, 2015, THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION WAS CARRIED OUT AS UNDER: BOARD: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA SUGGESTED BY THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS EVALUATED THE PERFORMANCE OF THE BOARD, HAVING REGARD TO VARIOUS CRITERIA SUCH AS BOARD COMPOSITION, BOARD PROCESSES, BOARD DYNAMICS ETC. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT PERFORMANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS A WHOLE WAS SATISFACTORY. COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD: THE PERFORMANCE OF AUDIT COMMITTEE, CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY COMMITTEE, NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE AND STAKEHOLDERS RELATIONSHIP COMMITTEE WAS EVALUATED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY HAVING REGARD TO VARIOUS CRITERIA SUCH AS COMMITTEE COMPOSITION, COMMITTEE PROCESSES, COMMITTEE DYNAMICS, PRESENCE OF MEMBERS, NO. OF MEETINGS HELD ETC. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT ALL THE COMMITTEES WERE PERFORMING THEIR FUNCTIONS SATISFACTORILY AND ACCORDING TO THE MANDATE PRESCRIBED BY THE BOARD UNDER THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, THE RULES FRAMED THEREUNDER AND SEBI (LODR) REGULATIONS, 2015 INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS: (A) INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA SUGGESTED BY THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE, THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR WAS EVALUATED BY THE ENTIRE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (EXCLUDING THE DIRECTOR BEING EVALUATED) ON BROAD PARAMETERS LIKE ENGAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP, ANALYSIS, DECISION MAKING, COMMUNICATION, GOVERNANCE AND INTEREST OF STAKEHOLDERS. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR WAS A REPUTED PROFESSIONAL AND BROUGHT HIS/HER RICH EXPERIENCE TO THE DELIBERATIONS OF THE BOARD. THE BOARD ALSO APPRECIATED THE CONTRIBUTION MADE BY ALL INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS IN GUIDING THE MANAGEMENT FOR ACHIEVING GROWTH AND CONTINUANCE OF EACH INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR ON THE BOARD WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE COMPANY. (B) NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS: THE PERFORMANCE OF EACH OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS EVALUATED BY THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AT THEIR SEPARATE MEETING HELD ON 26TH JUNE, 2020 WHEREIN ALL THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WERE PRESENT. FURTHER, THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS ALSO EVALUATED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THE VARIOUS CRITERIA CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVALUATION INCLUDED LEADERSHIP, ENGAGEMENT, TRANSPARENCY, ANALYSIS, DECISION MAKING, FUNCTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, GOVERNANCE AND INTEREST OF STAKEHOLDERS. THE BOARD WAS OF THE UNANIMOUS VIEW THAT EACH OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS PROVIDING GOOD BUSINESS AND PEOPLE LEADERSHIP. |
| PURSUANT TO THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND REGULATIONS 17 AND 25 OF THE SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS), REGULATIONS, 2015, THE BOARD HAS CARRIED OUT AN ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF ITS OWN PERFORMANCE, OF INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS AS WELL AS THE EVALUATION OF THE WORKING OF ITS AUDIT, NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION, AND OTHER COMMITTEES. THE VARIOUS CRITERIA CONSIDERED FOR EVALUATION OF WHOLE TIME / EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS INCLUDED QUALIFICATION, EXPERIENCE, KNOWLEDGE, COMMITMENT, INTEGRITY, LEADERSHIP, ENGAGEMENT, TRANSPARENCY, ANALYSIS, DECISION MAKING, GOVERNANCE ETC. THE BOARD COMMENDED THE VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE GUIDANCE PROVIDED BY EACH DIRECTOR IN ACHIEVING THE DESIRED LEVELS OF GROWTH. THIS IS IN ADDITION TO EVALUATION OF NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AND THE BOARD AS A WHOLE BY THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS AT THEIR SEPARATE MEETING BEING HELD EVERY YEAR. |
| PURSUANT TO THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH REGULATIONS 17 AND 25 OF THE SEBI (LODR) REGULATIONS, 2015, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAS CARRIED OUT AN ANNUAL EVALUATION OF ITS OWN PERFORMANCE, THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS AND THE FUNCTIONING OF ITS COMMITTEES, INCLUDING THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE AND OTHER COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD. THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE WHOLE-TIME/ EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS WAS CONDUCTED BASED ON VARIOUS QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, QUALIFICATIONS, EXPERIENCE, DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE, COMMITMENT, INTEGRITY, LEADERSHIP CAPABILITIES, STRATEGIC VISION, LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT, TRANSPARENCY, ANALYTICAL SKILLS, DECISION-MAKING AND ADHERENCE TO SOUND GOVERNANCE PRACTICES. THE BOARD NOTED WITH APPRECIATION THE VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS, STRATEGIC INSIGHTS AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED BY EACH DIRECTOR, WHICH HAVE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN ACHIEVING THE COMPANY’S OBJECTIVES AND FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE GROWTH. IN ADDITION, AS REQUIRED UNDER REGULATION 25 OF THE SEBI (LODR) REGULATIONS, 2015, A SEPARATE MEETING OF THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS HELD, WHERE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS, THE BOARD AS A WHOLE, AND THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMPANY WAS REVIEWED AND EVALUATED. |