Vol: 2, Issue: 2 2012

Page: 82-89

Financial Performance Management Practices in Corporate Enterprises: A Case Study of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Haridwar

Dr. V. N. Gupta

Received Date: 2012-03-23

Accepted Date: 2012-04-21

Published Date: 2012-05-20

The current study is concise up to Bharat Heavy electrical Limited (BHEL), Haridwar as one of the most renounce and heavy loaded power generation centre in India Thus our effort has been to make an objective study of the growth and financial evaluation of BHEL, which is a public sector undertaking in Power sector. Much depends on the skill and competence of the management and whether it is carrying on the operations efficiently on the basis of modern management concepts and practices or not. The government policy also influences the growth and performance of such concerns and our endeavour has been to examine and evaluate the Government policy in this connection. The result of the study shown that • In spite of the global economic recession and financial turmoil, BHEL has continued generating tremendous profits. Profitability ratios indicate the firm has high operating efficiency backed by a strong management. BHEL is a capital goods manufacturing industry. In general, the industrial average capital goods manufacturing industry for liquidity ratios is quite low. But BHEL has a sound liquid position as suggested by various liquidity ratios of BHEL.

References

• Annual Reports of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
• Bhaya, H. (1990): "Management Efficiency in the Private and Public Sectors in India" in J. Heath (ed.), Public Enterprise at the Crossroads, London: Routledge.
• Centre for monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE): PROWESS, a Corporate database
• Jha, R. and B.S. Sahni (1992). "Measures of Efficiency in Private and Public Sector Industries: The Case of India", Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 63(3):489495.
• Joshi, V. and I.M.D. Little (1994) "India - Macroeconomics andPolitical Economy 1964-1991", New Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress.
• Joshi, V. and I.M.D. Little (1997). "India-Reform on Hold"Asian Development Review, 15(2): 1-42.
• Kaur, S. (1998) "Privatisation or Public Regulation - A Managerial Perspective", Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Delhi.
• Kaur, S. (2002), "The Employment Implication of Divestiture: TheIndian Experience", Vision, 6 (1): 59-72.
• Kumar, S. (1992). "Public Enterprise Policy and Reform Measures in the 1990s", Management in Government. 22(2-3): 433-439
• Majumdar, S.K (1995). "Public,Joint and Private Sectorsin Indian Industry - Evaluating Relative Performance Differences",Economic and Political Weekly, XXX (7-8): M25-32.
• Naib, S. (2003). "Partial Divestiture and Performance of Indian Public Sector Enterprise", Economic and Political Weekly,XXXVIII (29): 3088-3093.
• Naib, S. (2004) "Disinvestment in India", Sage Publications, New Delhi.
• NCAER (2000). "So Many Lost Years", NCAER Report to theMinistry of Industry, Government of India.
• Pande, A. (1999). "Public Sector Competitiveness", Productivity,40(2): 193-197.
• Reserve Bank of India. Report on Currency and Finance, VariousIssues.
• Sharma, R.C. and N. Sinha (1995). "Frontier System andEstimation of Productive Efficiency in Intra- Industrial Private andPublic Firms", The Journal of Institute of Public Enterprise, XVIII (1-2): 27-35.
• Singh, A. (1971). "Takeovers: Their Relevance to the Stock Market and the Theory of the Firm, Cambridge" CambridgeUniversity Press.
• Yarrow, J. (1975). "Privatization in Theory and Practice",Economic Policy, 2:323-364.9
• Annual Report of BHEL 2001-02
• Annual Report of BHEL 2002-03
• Annual Report of BHEL 2004-05