The controversy that has erupted on social media over the tenancy and usage of the reported 1.6 acre Ghaswalla Bungalow (GB) complex in Poona is another stark reminder of the problems faced by trusts managing community property. In the past, the tussle would have remained largely between the trust and the tenant/licensee. But now with the ubiquitous presence of chat groups, anyone, anywhere, with even a modicum of interest in community matters is informed of each twist and turn.
On the evening of August 11, 2022 when the recently elected vice chairman of the Poona Parsee Panchayat (PPP) Yezdi Motiwalla allegedly barged into the disputed premises with some supporters and recorded a video claiming the property was being misused and encroached upon, the two-minute-50-second recording went viral on WhatsApp. The PPP chairman Tehmasp Bharucha berated him for attempting to settle a trust dispute through social media (see "Motiwalla’s mission," pg 20). Once an issue becomes public, the parties harden their stand; face saving gains precedence over arriving at a fair settlement. For better or worse, the GB issue is now fully in the public glare.
A localized WhatsApp group, "Ghaswalla Baugh Supporter" formed in March 2019, received a booster shot after the Motiwalla video was uploaded. As with most such groups, the number of irrelevant posts, forwards, accusations, greetings, etc proliferate. The administrators in some cases discipline the erring members and even threaten to bar them. Some appointed to oversee the content may adopt a lax approach and permit transgressions. On some groups, only the administrator/s can post comments.
The GB imbroglio is a complex one. The premises located in the Poona Cantonment area are reportedly meant to be used only for residential purposes. But the earlier trustees, maybe through oversight, permitted their use as a godown. In 2005, a case was filed by the PPP, the landlord, against the tenant, Dorabjee and Company, a reputed establishment that runs a chain of supermarkets and grocery stores. A compromise settlement was arrived at in March 2022, just before the election for new trustees. The present board now intends to file a fresh suit. The police have also launched an inquiry into the August 11 entry of Motiwalla and others into the GB complex. Bharucha and Motiwalla were called for questioning on August 29, and their statements recorded.
An enormous amount of community time, personnel, office infrastructure and money is being spent on a property that is unlikely to have a positive outcome in the near future. While trustees are obligated to manage all the assets of a trust, disputed properties take up disproportionate time and attention. As a result, other assets are neglected.
Retired Bombay High Court Justice Shahrukh Kathawalla, in his talk at the 175th anniversary celebrations of the Seth Viccaji-Seth Pestonji Meherji Parsi Fire Temple in Secunderabad on July 31, 2022 stated, "I do not agree that trust property cannot be sold…If there is encroachment or daunting expenses, we should be open to selling (see ‘Memorializing Meherji,’ Parsiana, August 21-September 6, 2022)." How long can a trust oversee the upkeep, security, tax dues, etc of a property when there are not enough able community members around to manage or finance the asset?
Over 48 years ago, in the May 1974 issue of Parsiana, we asked the seven trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) and six lay people whether there were too many fire temples in Bombay. (The column where usually seven lay people selected at random were asked their views on community topics was a regular, popular and often controversial feature in the magazine. Some readers felt the views of the laity were irrelevant and only trustees, scholars, head priests, lawyers and the like should be asked to opine.)
Of the seven trustees, four responded, with three agreeing there were too many agiaries and one stating the number was correct but in some cases the location was inappropriate. Of the six lay people, five responded ‘yes,’ with one voicing concern that some priests may be rendered unemployed! One interviewee said the number was right.
At that time we had requested the BPP to provide us a list of fire temples in Bombay. The listing showed a total of 50 dadgahs, adarians and atash behrams. All continue to exist, and in the intervening years four new fire temples have been added, one each at Salsette, Godrej Baug, Vasai and New Bombay, bringing the total to 54!
Selling/merging/changing use of trust property is a sensitive issue. In the almost 40 years since The Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India constituted the Defunct Anjumans Committee, the all-India body has not been able to dispose of a single property. In that duration even more properties have been encroached upon and irretrievably lost to the community.
In the 2008 BPP trusteeship election, the first to be held under universal adult franchise, one trustee aspirant had vowed that not one inch of BPP property would be sold under his watch. On being elected, he and his co-trustees endorsed this policy. The first casualty was the proposed sale of the moribund Parsi Lying-In Hospital to the Cathedral and John Connon School trust which was stymied. Subsequently a project to convert the decaying structure into a state-of-the-art orthopedic hospital came to naught after the proposal was challenged in the Supreme Court. The developer/financier, after waiting several years for the project to fructify, lost interest. Another public notice inviting offers for developing the institution drew a feeble response.
Similarly the proposal to set up a state-of-the-art, cosmopolitan hospital on The B. D. Petit Parsee General Hospital (PGH) grounds was jettisoned. The Parsi donor who envisioned the project to financially sustain the loss-making PGH, withdrew his magnanimous offer made around six years earlier.
If we are to hold on to any of our assets, we have to prioritize what to retain and what to develop, lease or sell. Otherwise, like so many defunct anjumans, we may one day be left with nothing.