GECs
Discussions on about Nayak’s exit terms
MUMBAI / NEW DELHI: Star India and its executive vice-president sales and marketing, LS ‘Raj’ Nayak, are still grappling with the issue of making the latter’s exit from the company as amicable as possible. The next 48 hours will decide whether any of the parties concerned will knock on the doors of the court or not.
Industry sources told indiantelevision.com that several rounds of talks have been held between Nayak and the top honchos of Star India (read chief executive Peter Mukerjea). A few more rounds are scheduled over the next two days to hammer out a solution.
But one thing seems certain: after having spent over nine years in Star’s Indian operations, Nayak wants to test the waters solo.
When contacted today, a spokesperson for Star India said: “We have no comment to offer. It is something between an employee and the employer and is a private affair.”
Still, industry sources said L’affair Nayak may be tricky and has the potential of throwing up many twists and turns before coming to an end, a la one of the Star Plus soaps that Nayak has been aggressively selling to advertisers.
The grey areas emerge from the fact that Nayak, as other senior executives of Star India, including Mukerjea, had signed a three-year contract with Star early last year. Nayak’s imminent departure from Star now, almost 18 months before the contract comes to an end, may have legal implications.
A legal expert in Delhi, being posed this question, said even though she is not aware of the details of the contract, but on the face of it, the employer (that is Star India) can take legal recourse if the employee (Nayak) is adamant on leaving the company much before the contract signed between them expires.
The flip side, the legal expert pointed out, is that it is highly unlikely to assume that a contract will not have exit clauses for the employee too. This means that it is unusual for a contract to be signed, which possibly states that an employer can fire an employee, but the latter cannot quit the company before the expiry of the contract period, the expert explained.
It is probably this scenario that both Star and Nayak are trying to avoid. What does the contract, signed between Nayak and Star, state is not known to indiantelevision.com. And nobody is holding forth on the details either.
GECs
Sahara One reports financial results, notes director exit and business realignment
Muted revenues, steady expenses and strategic adjustments shape company’s current phase
MUMBAI: In a tale where the sands seem to be slipping faster than they can be gathered, Sahara One Media and Entertainment Limited has reported another quarter of wafer-thin income and widening losses, even as a boardroom exit adds to the unease.
The company informed the Bombay Stock Exchange that its board, in a meeting held on April 4, approved its unaudited financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2025. The numbers paint a stark picture. Total income for the quarter stood at just Rs 0.13 lakh, unchanged sequentially and sharply down from Rs 0.26 lakh a year earlier.
Losses, meanwhile, deepened. The company posted a net loss of Rs 24.16 lakh for the quarter, compared to Rs 18.81 lakh in the June quarter and Rs 39.69 lakh in the same period last year. For the six months ended September 2025, the cumulative loss stood at Rs 39.69 lakh, while the full-year loss for FY25 was reported at Rs 60.72 lakh.
Expenses continued to outweigh income by a wide margin. Total expenses for the quarter came in at Rs 24.30 lakh, led by employee benefit costs of Rs 6.51 lakh and other expenses of Rs 17.78 lakh. Earnings per share remained in the red at Rs (0.11) for the quarter.
The balance sheet reflects a company with significant assets on paper but limited operational momentum. Total assets stood at Rs 23,065.57 lakh as of September 30, 2025, broadly unchanged from March 2025. Equity share capital remained steady at Rs 2,152.50 lakh, while total equity was reported at Rs 18,004.85 lakh.
Cash and cash equivalents saw a modest uptick to Rs 6.75 lakh from Rs 4.68 lakh earlier, supported by a positive operating cash flow of Rs 180.01 lakh for the period.
Yet, beneath these numbers lies a more complex narrative. The company’s auditors flagged their inability to obtain sufficient evidence to form a conclusion on the financial statements, citing lack of access to records. They also raised concerns over the company’s ability to continue as a going concern, pointing to insufficient funds, delayed recoveries, and stalled content investments.
Adding to the governance overhang, the company disclosed that Rana Zia has resigned as whole-time director, effective October 16, 2025, citing other professional commitments. The resignation, noted and accepted by the board, also brings an end to her role across company committees.
Regulatory pressures continue to loom large. The Securities and Exchange Board of India has already initiated penal actions for non-compliance with listing norms, with trading in the company’s shares remaining suspended. There is also a risk of promoter demat accounts being frozen.
Legacy legal issues remain unresolved. A substantial deposit of Rs 694,027.88 thousand linked to the long-running OFCD dispute involving Sahara group entities is still under the purview of the Supreme Court of India. Restrictions on asset disposal continue to weigh on the company’s financial flexibility.
Operationally, challenges persist across multiple fronts. Advances worth Rs 1,92,916 thousand given for film content remain stuck, with delays in project completion and uncertain recoverability. The company’s YouTube channel, despite being operational, has generated no revenue for over three years due to compliance lapses. In a further twist, management has indicated that revenues may have been fraudulently diverted through unauthorised changes to its AdSense account, with a police complaint in the works.
There are also missed revenue opportunities. Television content rights continue to be used by a related party despite the expiry of the licence agreement, with fresh negotiations still underway.
For now, Sahara One Media and Entertainment Limited appears caught between legacy disputes and present-day operational hurdles. As losses linger and governance questions mount, the road to recovery looks less like a sprint and more like a slow trudge through shifting sands.
