Gensol Engineering’s MD Anmol Singh Jaggi steps down; Puneet Singh Jaggi steps down as whole-time director

In a resignation mail, Anmol Singh Jaggi stated that he was resigning from the post due to the direction given under SEBI Interim Order dated April 15, 2025.

By
  • Storyboard18,
| May 12, 2025 , 7:09 pm
Witnessing government lapses, SEBI took several stringent measures. The Jaggi brothers were even barred from holding any directorship or key management position in Gensol. (From left to right: Anmol Singh Jaggi and Puneet Singh Jaggi)
Witnessing government lapses, SEBI took several stringent measures. The Jaggi brothers were even barred from holding any directorship or key management position in Gensol. (From left to right: Anmol Singh Jaggi and Puneet Singh Jaggi)

Anmol Singh Jaggi, managing director of Gensol Engineering, has stepped down from his role, the company announced, following regulatory action initiated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). Puneet Singh Jaggi, a whole-time director and also a key figure at the firm, has likewise resigned from his position.

In an internal communication, Anmol Jaggi cited compliance with SEBI’s interim order, issued on April 15, as the reason for his departure. “I take this opportunity to thank the entire Board, the Management Team and the employees of the Company for the support and cooperation extended to me during my tenure,” he wrote.

The resignations follow a ruling last week by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, which declined to grant Gensol Engineering any relief from SEBI’s directives. The regulatory body has taken a series of stringent measures, citing governance lapses. These include barring the Jaggi brothers and the company from accessing the securities market until further notice.

Additionally, SEBI has prohibited both Anmol and Puneet Jaggi from serving in any directorial or key managerial capacity within Gensol, according to a report by Moneycontrol.

Read More: ED detains Gensol’s Puneet Singh Jaggi in alleged money laundering case; conducts searches against firm

Leave a comment