My contribution to a board
I want to contribute where a correct number can still support the wrong conclusion. In my executive work, 282 occupied racks and 1.32 MW contracted power both described the business accurately, but they answered different questions about a proposed investment. Similarly, a receivable did not automatically qualify for a particular borrowing facility, and an annual customer fee did not settle the premises rights needed for the full term. A board can ask management to make those relationships clear without taking over site operations. I would bring financial interpretation and experience of its limits, including my own initial overuse of an occupancy figure. The attraction is a sustained contribution to consequential decisions, with enough preparation to understand the enterprise on its own terms. I do not want a title that implies broad technical expertise or independent eligibility that I have not established.
Judgement in practice
01Identify the constraint that the capital proposal would change
The reviewed account had 282 occupied rack positions from 400, or 70.5%, and 1.32 MW contracted IT capacity against 2.4 MW installed, or 55%. Those figures are compatible but describe different dimensions. I would ask a board whether management has linked the proposed expenditure to the actual operating and customer constraint. Qualified engineering and safety owners must determine supported configurations. Our ₹41 lakh review informed a choice of ₹8.6 crore defined improvements while deferring a separate ₹28 crore hall proposal. The ₹19.4 crore difference is not a saving because the scopes differ. The oversight contribution is to make the alternatives and their assumptions assessable, while preserving the legitimate case for planning ahead of contracted demand and leaving management accountable for delivery.
02Separate the receivable from the amount a facility can support
The reviewed ₹12 crore receivables account comprised disjoint groups: ₹4 crore overdue, ₹2 crore disputed, ₹1 crore related-party and ₹5 crore eligible under the specific facility. Its 80% advance condition supported ₹4 crore against ₹4.8 crore drawn. Repaying ₹80 lakh from ₹3.2 crore unrestricted cash left ₹2.4 crore immediately, before any other flows. I would ask directors whether the borrowing report preserves eligibility, conditions and timing instead of treating the full ledger as available liquidity. Exclusion from this facility does not itself establish impairment or non-collection. Nor does the resulting cash balance establish that every future obligation is funded. The board should see the actual facility position and the remaining liquidity questions, with credit, accounting and legal judgements kept distinct.
03Trace the customer term to the rights that support delivery
A proposed July 2025–June 2032 customer term extended beyond a lease ending May 2028. After ₹46 lakh diligence and negotiation, an extension covered June 2028–May 2033 at ₹1.5 crore annual rent, compared with the previous ₹1.2 crore. The future ₹30 lakh increase began with the extension; it was not 2025 spending. I would ask the board to examine the opportunity, supporting rights and residual commitment together. The extension continued beyond the customer term, so it did not remove duration exposure. Acceptance followed legal and technical approvals, without claiming risk-free delivery or recognising seven years of fees at once. Directors can challenge the completeness of this account while leaving negotiation, technical feasibility and accounting treatment with the responsible professionals.
My first year on a board
My first year would begin with the company's actual contracts, financial reporting boundaries and principal operating dependencies, accessed through the process agreed by the chair. I would follow one investment paper from the measure management uses through the underlying commercial and technical explanation. I would also examine how liquidity reporting distinguishes booked receivables, eligible borrowing and cash available for obligations. That work would be oversight preparation, not a second finance department or a direct instruction line to facilities. I would complete the required preparation associated with my databank registration and any applicable appointment conditions. Committee participation would depend on eligibility, the charter and demonstrated fit; I do not claim chair readiness. At the annual review I would ask whether my contribution had improved the board's understanding of important choices, whether I had listened to operating expertise and whether the time commitment remained sustainable.
Conflicts and their management
Before receiving confidential material, I would map Vezmoli's customers, property owners, lenders, suppliers, investors and ownership vehicles against the prospective enterprise. Employer consent is necessary, and recurring exclusions may make a role unsuitable even where individual matters can be disclosed. Qualified advisers would examine the Companies Act's independence requirements, applicable SEBI LODR provisions, directorship limits and the responsibilities of any proposed committee. I have no current statutory seat and claim no assessment exemption; my August 2026 databank registration is not evidence of completed qualification for a particular appointment. Twenty-four days must include induction, papers, meetings, travel and exceptional demands alongside the CFO role. Customer workloads, facility records, financing conditions and property agreements from my employer would not become another board's resources. If a prospective contribution depended on those materials or relationships, I would explain the boundary and decline where a useful role could not be sustained.
My independence statement
My employment connects me to colocation customers, property owners, lenders, suppliers and the company's owners. I hold no personal or employee-vehicle allocation, but that fact alone cannot establish independence. The actual relationships and appointment requirements would need examination for the prospective company.
Board and committee exposure
Presented to the Board or a committee
Vezmoli Colocation Services
Finance presentations to the board; no statutory seat or committee membership
September 2020 onward
Presents the enterprise financial account through CEO Savitri Zemqathi, including capacity investment, borrowing availability and premises commitments. The earlier Finance Director title was functional, not a statutory appointment.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Registered
Registered with the IICA databank in August 2026; proficiency assessment unfinished, no exemption claimed. Registration is not appointment eligibility.
- Complete the relevant assessment preparation and keep registration requirements current
- Study the prospective enterprise and the actual duties of its proposed committees
- Work with qualified advisers on eligibility, relationships and appointment conditions
Committee contribution
Chair and member readiness| Capacity | Committees |
|---|
| Ready to join | Audit committee considering financial reporting and liquidity, after eligibility and induction review · Risk committee examining contractual duration and investment dependencies, where the charter fits |
|---|
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 24 days per year
- Current directorships
- 0
- Sectors
- Infrastructure service operators in leased premises · Business-service enterprises with long customer commitments · Companies whose capital decisions depend on multiple operating measures
- Company type
- An established enterprise seeking financial interpretation alongside strong operating, engineering and legal oversight
- Company stage
- Assessing a material investment or reconciling long commercial promises with the rights and resources beneath them
The seat I am pursuing
I am seeking a first board appointment in an enterprise where financial clarity depends on understanding continuing operational commitments. A suitable board would already have the engineering, legal and commercial perspectives needed for its business and could explain how my finance experience would complement them. Audit or risk participation could be considered after the relevant review and induction, without a claim to chair either committee. The organisation should be prepared to examine assumptions and unfinished outcomes rather than ask for an unqualified endorsement of its investment story. I would assess the fit against real relationships, consent and the calendar. A specific role with enough time to contribute would be more valuable than a broad sector label unsupported by the decisions the board actually faces.