| PURSUANT TO THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND THE SEBI LISTING REGULATIONS, THE BOARD CARRIED OUT THE ANNUAL EVALUATION OF ITS OWN PERFORMANCE, THE PERFORMANCE OF ITS COMMITTEES, AND THAT OF INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS, INCLUDING THE CHAIRMAN. THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE (NRC) DEFINED THE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND ESTABLISHED THE MECHANISM FOR CONDUCTING THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS. DURING FY 2025-26, THE COMPANY ENGAGED A LEADING HR CONSULTING FIRM TO FACILITATE THE BOARD EVALUATION SURVEY. THE PROCESS INVOLVED STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRES CIRCULATED AMONG BOARD MEMBERS, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND DIRECTORS TO OBTAIN FEEDBACK ON VARIOUS ASPECTS OF BOARD AND COMMITTEE FUNCTIONING. THE CONSULTING FIRM COMPILED THE RESPONSES, IDENTIFIED KEY INFERENCES AND OBSERVATIONS, AND PREPARED A CONSOLIDATED REPORT, WHICH WAS SHARED WITH THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD FOR REVIEW AND FOR PROVIDING FEEDBACK TO EACH DIRECTOR. THE EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD INCLUDED PARAMETERS SUCH AS COMPOSITION AND DIVERSITY, QUALITY OF DELIBERATIONS, EFFECTIVENESS IN SETTING STRATEGY AND OVERALL DIRECTION, BOARD PROCESSES, RELATIONS WITH MANAGEMENT, CONTRIBUTION TO DECISION-MAKING, BOARD DEVELOPMENT, AND TIMELINESS OF INFORMATION FLOW. FOR COMMITTEES, THE CRITERIA COVERED STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION, EFFECTIVE PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS, QUALITY OF DELIBERATIONS, SUGGESTIONS MADE, AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD. A SEPARATE PEER REVIEW EXERCISE WAS UNDERTAKEN TO EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS, WHILE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CHAIRMAN WAS ASSESSED BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM ALL OTHER DIRECTORS. ADDITIONALLY, THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS, AT THEIR EXCLUSIVE MEETING HELD DURING THE YEAR, REVIEWED THE PERFORMANCE OF THE BOARD, ITS CHAIRMAN, AND NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS, ALONG WITH OTHER MATTERS AS STIPULATED UNDER THE LISTING REGULATIONS. |