A detailed review of the voting decisions made by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) has uncovered a significant and unexplained trend. The state-run insurer has consistently supported, and never opposed, shareholder resolutions proposed by corporate giants Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) and the Adani Group over the past 14 quarters. This pattern stands in stark contrast to its frequent rejections of similar proposals at other large companies, raising serious questions about its governance standards and decision-making processes.
A Pattern of Preferential Treatment?
The analysis, which examined approximately 9,000 of LIC's voting decisions since the beginning of the 2023 financial year, reveals a clear disparity. LIC approved all 63 shareholder resolutions put forth by Reliance Industries and Jio Financial Services during this period. In the case of Adani-owned companies, the insurer approved 351 out of 368 resolutions and abstained from voting on the remaining 17. It did not reject a single resolution from the Adani Group.
This record becomes more conspicuous when compared to LIC's overall voting behavior. Of the roughly 9,000 resolutions it voted on, LIC rejected just under 2%. This suggests that the rare instances of opposition were directed away from the country's two wealthiest business conglomerates. Experts are now questioning whether LIC, as the nation's largest money manager, applies different voting standards for companies controlled by Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani.
Inconsistencies in Director Appointments and Roles
The review highlights several specific instances where LIC's voting appears inconsistent. In August 2023, LIC voted in favor of reappointing Mukesh Ambani as the Managing Director of RIL, a role he holds while also being the company's Chairperson. However, in March 2025, LIC abstained from voting on a similar proposal for Venu Srinivasan's reappointment as Chairman Emeritus and Managing Director of TVS Motor Company.
This is significant because the separation of the roles of chairperson and managing director is considered a sound governance practice, one even recommended by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for top listed companies.
Further inconsistencies are evident in votes on independent directors. In June 2024, LIC approved the appointment of Haigreve Khaitan, who sits on eight company boards, as an independent director at RIL. Yet, just two months later, it abstained from voting on the re-appointment of Rajeev Gupta to the board of Indian Energy Exchange Ltd, citing his "excessive time commitments"—despite the fact that Gupta sits on only nine boards. Oddly, in the same week, LIC approved Gupta's appointment to the board of Pidilite Industries.
Adani Group and the Question of Qualified Accounts
The pattern of inconsistent voting extends to the Adani Group as well. A particularly glaring example involves LIC's own voting policy. The insurer's internal guidelines explicitly state that it "shall not support" the adoption of financial statements that have been qualified by auditors.
For the financial years 2023 and 2024, LIC abstained from voting on the adoption of Adani Enterprises' financial statements, which carried a qualified audit opinion related to ongoing investigations at Mumbai International Airport Ltd. However, in a complete reversal for FY25, LIC voted to approve the same company's financial statements, describing them as "unqualified financial statements" in its disclosures, despite the auditor's opinion remaining qualified.
This unexplained change in stance represents a direct violation of LIC's published voting policy and raises fundamental questions about the discipline applied to its investment decisions.
Fiduciary Duty and Market Impact
These inconsistent voting practices highlight a potential risk in how LIC manages its massive ₹57.23 trillion ($645 billion) in assets under management. As a fiduciary for millions of policyholders, LIC has a duty to uphold the principles outlined in its stewardship code, which aims to promote the long-term success of investee companies for the ultimate benefit of its investors.
Corporate governance experts have expressed deep concern. "If LIC votes against the recommendations of the regulator, how can anyone else take these matters seriously?" asked Sharmila Gopinath, an independent corporate governance consultant. She reiterated that when a large institutional investor like LIC casts inconsistent votes, it risks failing in its fiduciary duty to its policyholders.
While LIC's vote may not always change the outcome of a resolution, its position as the largest public investor in India means its voting practices set a benchmark for other institutional investors and shape expectations for corporate governance across the country. The unanswered questions surrounding its decisions for Reliance and Adani Group companies continue to cast a shadow over its role as a market steward.
