top of page
Search

SEBI Settles Minimum Public Shareholding Proceedings Against Four Adani Group Companies

Writer: Kaustav Chowdhury
Kaustav Chowdhury
2 hours ago
6 min read

Background and Facts

The Securities and Exchange Board of India has settled proceedings against four listed Adani group companies arising from alleged non-compliance with the minimum public shareholding requirement. The settlement was reported on September 28, 2026. The four companies are Adani Enterprises Limited, Adani Power Limited, Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited and Adani Energy Solutions Limited, formerly Adani Transmission Limited.

Each of the four paid a settlement amount of Rs 37.05 lakh. The group's chairman and thirteen other individuals settled the same matter separately. The period of the alleged shortfall is not disclosed in the reports of the settlement.

The provisions said to have been contravened are Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, which fixes the minimum level of public shareholding, together with Regulation 31 and Regulation 38 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, and the corresponding provisions of the listing agreement that preceded those Regulations.

Key Legal Issue

What the minimum public shareholding requirement obliges a listed company to do, how a shortfall becomes an enforcement matter under the listing regulations rather than merely a shareholding question, and what a settlement under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018 does and does not decide.

What the Requirement Is

Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 states the obligation in plain terms. Every listed company is to maintain public shareholding of at least twenty five per cent. Where the public shareholding in a listed company falls below that level, the company is to bring it back to twenty five per cent within a maximum period of twelve months.

The Rule then carries graded exceptions. A public sector company is held to a minimum of ten per cent, with longer transition periods. A fall caused by the depository receipts scheme or the share based employee benefits regulations attracts a three year window to restore the twenty five per cent level. A company implementing a resolution plan under the insolvency framework is given three years, and eighteen months where the holding falls below ten per cent.

Two features of that structure matter. The obligation is continuous rather than a listing condition satisfied once, and the twelve month window is an outer limit rather than an entitlement. A company that treats it as time to plan in has already consumed the period the Rule allows for execution.

How the Listing Regulations Carry It

Rule 19A does not sit on its own. Regulation 38 of the listing regulations requires a listed entity to comply with the requirements specified in Rule 19(2) and Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, in the manner specified by the Board from time to time, with an exception for entities listed on an institutional trading platform without making a public issue. The effect is that a shareholding shortfall is also a breach of the listing regulations, which is what brings it within the Board's enforcement powers over listed entities.

Regulation 31 supplies the visibility. A listed entity files its shareholding pattern with the stock exchanges one day prior to listing, then quarterly, and again within ten days of any capital restructuring resulting in a change exceeding two per cent of the total paid up share capital, with half yearly filing for entities on the small and medium enterprise exchange. The same Regulation requires the whole of the promoter and promoter group holding to be in dematerialised form on a continuous basis.

Read together, the two Regulations mean that a shortfall is almost always documented by the company itself before anyone else identifies it. The quarterly filing is the record a later proceeding is built on.

What a Settlement Decides

A settlement under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018 is not an adjudication. Regulation 3(1) allows a person against whom specified proceedings have been initiated and are pending, or may be initiated, to apply to the Board. Regulation 4(1) fixes the outer limit: an application in respect of a pending proceeding is not considered if it is made more than sixty days from the date of service of the notice to show cause. Regulation 23 then provides for the proceeding to be disposed of by an appropriate order on the approved terms, and Regulation 25 requires that order to be served and published on the Board's website.

The undertakings an applicant gives allow it either to admit the findings of fact and conclusions of law or neither to admit nor to deny them. Where the second course is taken, the proceeding ends without the applicant conceding the allegation, which is why a settlement amount is not a penalty and a settlement order is not a precedent on the underlying question. What the order does is end the exposure: the proceedings are closed, the amount is paid, and the regulatory file on that allegation is shut. The comparison for a listed entity is therefore not between the settlement amount and zero, but between it and the cost, duration and disclosure consequences of contesting the matter to a conclusion.

Practice Notes

In practice, the settlement is a reminder about monitoring rather than about litigation:

  • Track the public shareholding figure continuously: The obligation under Rule 19A is to maintain the level, not to report it. A company that discovers a shortfall when preparing the quarterly filing has already been in breach for part of the quarter.

  • Date the twelve month window from the fall, not from the filing: The period runs from when the shareholding falls below the threshold. Counting from the filing that revealed it gives a false margin.

  • Check whether a longer window applies before assuming it does: The three year and eighteen month periods attach to specific causes, including the depository receipts scheme, the share based employee benefits regulations and a resolution plan under the insolvency framework. A fall from an ordinary promoter transaction gets twelve months.

  • Treat the Regulation 31 filings as the evidentiary record: A shareholding pattern filed with the exchanges is the document a later proceeding will work from. Errors in it are difficult to unwind and are themselves a disclosure issue.

  • Diarise the sixty day settlement window: Under Regulation 4(1) an application in respect of a pending proceeding is not considered if made more than sixty days from service of the show cause notice. The decision whether to settle has to be taken while the reply to the notice is still being prepared.

Key Provisions Discussed

  • Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957: Every listed company is to maintain public shareholding of at least twenty five per cent, and where it falls below that level the company is to bring it back to twenty five per cent within a maximum period of twelve months, subject to a lower threshold of ten per cent for public sector companies and to longer restoration periods where the fall is caused by the depository receipts scheme, the share based employee benefits regulations or the implementation of a resolution plan.

  • Regulation 38 of the Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements Regulations, 2015: A listed entity is to comply with the requirements specified in Rule 19(2) and Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 in the manner specified by the Board from time to time, with an exception for entities listed on an institutional trading platform without making a public issue.

  • Regulation 31 of the Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements Regulations, 2015: A listed entity files its shareholding pattern with the stock exchanges one day prior to listing, quarterly thereafter, and within ten days of any capital restructuring changing the paid up capital by more than two per cent, with half yearly filing for entities on the small and medium enterprise exchange, and is to keep the entire promoter and promoter group holding in dematerialised form on a continuous basis.

  • Securities and Exchange Board of India (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018: Regulation 3(1) permits a person against whom specified proceedings are pending or may be initiated to apply to the Board; Regulation 4(1) bars consideration of an application made more than sixty days from service of the show cause notice in a pending proceeding; Regulation 23 provides for disposal of the proceeding by an appropriate order on the approved terms; and Regulation 25 requires the order to be served and published.

Matter Details

  • Regulator: Securities and Exchange Board of India

  • Reported: September 28, 2026

  • Entities Settling: Adani Enterprises Limited, Adani Power Limited, Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited and Adani Energy Solutions Limited, formerly Adani Transmission Limited

  • Settlement Amount: Rs 37.05 lakh for each of the four companies

  • Individuals: The group's chairman and thirteen other individuals settled the same matter separately

  • Allegation: Non-compliance with the minimum public shareholding requirement under Rule 19A of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, read with Regulation 31 and Regulation 38 of the listing regulations

  • Effect: Proceedings disposed of on approved terms under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018

Sources and References


Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their circumstances.

Comments

bottom of page