Archive

The Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trusteeship elections that had been thwarted for over a year by the majority trustees and their mentor will probably be held on May 29, 2022. Bombay High Court (BHC) Justices Shahrukh Kathawalla and Milind Jadhav set the election schedule at a tumultuous hearing on Tuesday, March 1. Former BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta had asked for more time and told Kathawalla to use his judicial powers "judiciously.” An annoyed Kathawalla responded with a "Shut up. Who are you...?” Mehta replied, "An intervenor” which the Justice replied he was not. The time for intervening had passed. Farhanaz (Farah) Irani, a prospective trusteeship candidate, then asked the Justices’ permission to speak for two minutes. Her request was refused but she persisted. An angered Kathawalla then ordered a female constable to remove her from the Court and instructed all the parties, including the five BPP trustees, barring only the lawyers, to leave the courtroom.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The amendments to the BPP election scheme and the code of conduct were approved by all parties on February 25. The one-and-a-half-hour hearing on that day saw all five trustees, their lawyers and the intervenors pore over the final changes made to the amendments. Mehta wanted one day more to study the changes but Kathawalla turned down the request stating that Mehta should not come to Court "with a frame of mind to oppose.” Mehta cited his age, 80, to emphasize his inability to go through the changes in a short time. Kathawalla remarked that when they offered him a chair to sit on, Mehta did not avail of it. After studying the changes for some time Mehta had spent the rest of the 90 minutes surveying the courtroom. 
He also complained about the Parsiana Facebook posts citing the adverse comments made against him by Kathawalla. He said only the Court decisions should be reported, not remarks made by the Justices! His request was laughed off. He also said Parsiana should be among the publications listed to refrain from publishing any defamatory material once the elections were announced. He was informed the publication was already in the list of Parsi media drawn up. 
To further delay the elections Mehta may challenge the BHC election order in the Supreme Court. As Kathawalla told him during a three-hour hearing on February 22, "Please go to the Supreme Court. Let the community see what you are doing. See if the community forgives you. They will never forget what you have done.” Mehta and the three majority trustees, chairwoman Armaity Tirandaz, Viraf Mehta and Xerxes Dastur who do his bidding (Dastur on rare occasions takes an independent position) stand to lose their hold on the 349-year or so old trust. The two minority trustees are Noshir Dadrawala and Kersi Randeria.
The elections had been originally scheduled for March 2021 but through various maneuvers Dinshaw and the trio managed to thrice thwart the holding of the elections for over a year and two months. At a meeting with community activists on October 12, 2021, when pressured to state a date for holding the elections by a vote of two is to two (Dastur was absent at that meet) with Tirandaz giving the casting vote, the trustees pushed the election to October 2022! Throughout much of that discussion Viraf was on the phone with his father Dinshaw while Tirandaz kept turning to Viraf about what line of action she should follow. Dadrawala then went on an indefinite fast to press for earlier elections.

 

 

 

 

 

Dinshaw alleged the amendments to the electoral scheme were propounded by noted lawyers Darius Khambata and Berjis Desai, instead of by the majority trustees as required under the scheme. This argument was demolished by the perceptive amicus curiae, Sharan Jagtiani, who cited extracts from various emails and other communications between the trustees and others to show "it is absolutely a scheme by the trustees.” The statement was reaffirmed by Karl Tamboly, the lawyer for Randeria and Dadrawala. Even the code of conduct which Dinshaw alleged was by Khambata and Desai was shown to be initiated by the trustees. As for Dinshaw’s assertion that the matter should have been heard before a single judge and not a division bench, Kathawalla berated him for raising the issue at this late stage instead of on January 12 following the Justices’ decision made in their chamber to hear the matter after following due process. Dinshaw was trying to "create a record” for an appeal, Kathawalla had opined. He directed Dinshaw "to see to the community’s progress,” instead of his own. An uncharacteristically contrite Dinshaw apologized for the delay stating, "I thought somebody else would” raise the objection. All "what we have done is in the interests of the community,” responded Kathawalla.
Earlier the Justice had admonished Tirandaz and Dastur for not being present in Court during the hearing. "Something very important is being discussed and the trustees remain absent. Don’t they have priorities?” He noted the two had been absent at an earlier hearing as well. 
Kathawalla was not in agreement with Mehta’s suggestion to lower the Rs 10 lakh (USD 13,260) donation for a donor to avail of two votes instead of one for the elections. He said he was not in favor of people buying votes and would have liked the donor register to be scrapped altogether. A clause that required a majority of trustees to agree to a sale of property was dropped. Dinshaw wanted to amend the clause so that a sale would have to be unanimous while his son Viraf had earlier stated the proposal should be removed. "Father and son differ,” remarked Kathawalla. "We differ on many points,” replied Viraf. "You should see our discussion over the dinner table.” An annoyed Kathawalla chastised both noting that their personal differences should not be aired in Court. "You can’t keep changing your point of view,” Kathawalla chided Viraf who maintained, "We always wanted (the consent to sell) to be unanimous.”
On February 3, the majority trustees agreed on several points but asked for time to discuss the issues amongst themselves and presumably with Dinshaw. Kathawalla sensed the majority trustees were trying to delay the election process to remain in power. "I detest this conduct,” he said granting a day’s extension.
The next day the majority trio changed their stand on several issues they had agreed to the day before. They said they were not agreeable to the chairperson losing her/his casting vote should the number of trustees drop below seven. This clause was introduced to avoid midterm elections being held every time a trustee exited from the board. "If the casting vote remains, then hold midterm elections,” to avoid a majority-minority tussle, said Kathawalla. "Today you are a majority, if tomorrow a minority what will happen? All of you are thinking of yourselves, not the community.” 
In November 2021 a petition by two activists, Phiroze Amroliwalla and Zeree Jehangirji, believed to be close to Dinshaw, sought "upgradation of the voter list prior to holding elections.” Viewed as being a ploy to delay the elections, Kathawalla dismissed their assertions of working in the public interest. "Enough is enough,” he emphasized.
As for a move by the majority trustees to convert leave and license agreements to tenancy at a time when elections were nearing, their lawyer Firoz Bharucha stated as elections had not been announced there was no stay on taking policy decisions. Kathawalla said the aggrieved party could approach the courts.
At a board meeting on February 21, 2022, Tirandaz, Dastur and Viraf passed a resolution permitting licensees "to apply to the trustees to convert such leave and license agreement into a monthly contractual tenancy, subject to completion of legal formalities.” The trustees stated the decision was pending over six months. "We were asked to get a legal opinion before we took this forward.”
A legal opinion from solicitor Jehangir Mistry of Mulla and Mulla was obtained on February 21, confirming that the trustees were within their legal right to convert licenses to a monthly contractual tenancy. Dadrawala and Randeria stated, "Viraf insisted that trustees read the opinion and the subject be immediately discussed and a resolution be passed.” Dadrawala recorded his objection that a major policy decision like this should not be discussed by an outgoing board. Dastur had earlier told the Court no policy decisions should be taken before an election.
"This is misuse of their position as trustees to take a populist stand just before the upcoming elections to garner votes and extremely unfair to other contestants,” averred Dadrawala and Randeria.
The final judgment on who holds the community interest in mind will be made in less than three months. One can expect a keenly contested election between the Mehta and Randeria camps. The judicial and long drawn out electoral process should result in substantial voter turnout though the overall numbers will be low, allowing for the community’s declining demographics.