The main achievement of The Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India (FPZAI) meeting last month was that it was finally held! The all-India body that was expected to meet once or twice a year had not held a meeting — online or physical — for over three-and-a-half years. And even this gathering on January 21 and 22, 2023 (see "At last a meeting!" pg 16) was basically a West Zone B (Gujarat and Saurashtra) event rather than an all-India one.
Barring Bombay, Navsari, Surat, Baroda and Ahmedabad, none of the major metropolises or cities was present. Delhi, Calcutta, Madras, Bangalore [though a founding member had withdrawn from membership around 1978 when the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) left in a huff but unlike the subsequently humbled BPP, did not rejoin], Secunderabad-Hyderabad (viewing all the infighting in the body, suspended its membership), Poona (where six of the seven newly elected trustees recently resigned) and Nagpur were conspicuous by their absence. Not a word was uttered about the absenteeism or measures to bring estranged anjumans back into the fold.
One BPP trustee confessed he was unaware that the Mhow anjuman had sold three properties and that no one had informed him about it. Parsiana had written about the sale (see "Three Mhow properties sold," December 7-20, 2022) and even commented on the subject editorially, "Show me the money," in the same issue. The trustee then stated he wanted to summon the anjuman representatives to Bombay to discuss the sale. Mhow had signed a custodian agreement with the FPZAI whereby once an anjuman is defunct (less than 15 members), the FPZAI would act as custodian of its funds and properties. But Mhow has not been declared a defunct anjuman and is functioning. The sale of their property was an internal matter of the trust and the Supreme Court had opined that the properties could be sold. The BPP trustee was also ignorant of the fact that the FPZAI does not have any authority to command anjumans to attend meetings.
The Federation is barred from interfering in the workings of any member anjuman unless the member asks for its intervention. The FPZAI’s reckless decision on July 30, 2017 to interfere in a matter pertaining to the Calcutta anjuman (see "Insistence on intervention," Parsiana, August 7, 2017), despite the latter’s opposition, has led to the West Bengal anjuman not attending FPZAI meetings over the last five years. The tussle was over an originating summons filed by two Calcutta lady residents asking the Calcutta High Court to opine on who the trust deed of the local fire temple would define as a Parsi. The agiary’s trustees are being legally represented in the matter.
The first day of the FPZAI deliberations on January 21 was, in the words of one prominent anjuman leader, "A criminal waste of time." The same could be said of the proceedings on the morning of January 22. Needless and endless discussions of little relevance to the general body dominated the proceedings on both days. It was only by the afternoon that the so-called all-India body started to deal with the issues that concern a federation. The reports of individual anjumans reflected the declining population, the dearth of priests, keeping fire temples operational and safeguarding community properties. One delegate stated there were no Parsis left in the anjuman he represented! The normal requirement to represent an anjuman is a letter from the anjuman addressed to the FPZAI authorizing the person to attend on its behalf. The number of defunct anjumans is countless.
When some delegates raised issues they were told to write to the FPZAI/BPP. Pat came the response: no replies are ever received! Even letters sent by Parsiana to the BPP trustees seeking clarifications receive no response.
One BPP trustee present believed the solution to the FPZAI’s non-performance was to appoint an honorary chief executive officer (CEO). There would be no monetary compensation, he added. He then proposed, got a seconder and even approval by the gathering for the appointment of Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayat president Brig Jahangir Anklesaria (retd) to the post. How someone sitting in Ahmedabad without adequate infrastructure and probably no authority to take decisions of any consequence could be the CEO of the FPZAI was not spelt out. At present, matters pertaining to the FPZAI are handled by the overburdened BPP personnel in Bombay. The appointment of a CEO was not even on the FPZAI’s agenda for either the general body or the executive council. It was a random, arbitrary and top-of-the-head suggestion to deflect the blame for non-performance from the present leadership (or the absence of such) to a newly created post and entity.
At many times during the meeting one was not aware of whether the general body meeting was in session or that of the executive council. Voting on issues and offices are to be done by one or the other body. At one stage a BPP trustee inquired if anybody was taking notes for the minutes! The two existing secretaries were removed from their positions. In another break from tradition, both the new honorary secretaries appointed were BPP trustees. In the past the joint honorary secretary was from another anjuman.
An item on the agenda — shifting the FPZAI office from the BPP premises — was not taken up for discussion. A BPP trustee inquired why the item was being repeated when the issue had been resolved. But the particular item referred to a resolution passed at the West Zone B meet in Valsad in July 2021. As no executive council or general body meeting has been held since, how could it have been discussed earlier? At the contentious May 5, 2019 meeting in Bombay where bodyguards had been hired to prevent several BPP trustees from entering, this item was on the agenda but dropped.
No date or venue has been fixed for the next meeting. The FPZAI was constituted with the best of intentions. The anjumans wanted a united, all-India forum and voice. The BPP had been lukewarm to the idea, probably believing they sufficiently represented the community in India. They relented but wanted safeguards to ensure their premier position in the body. The BPP chairperson was named the ex-officio president of the body "from time to time," to give the other anjumans a chance to hold the office. This clause was amended a few years back to drop the qualification "from time to time" in order to ensure the BPP’s hegemony.
Still, the body has survived in one form or the other, despite many ups and downs and varying degrees of leadership over 50 years. Its heyday was when it was a truly representative body with participation from anjumans all over the country, each one vying to host the meetings. Despite the Indian Parsis and Zoroastrians declining in numbers and energy levels, an all-India body can still serve a beneficial purpose, if it is permitted to do so. The Federation of Zoroastrian Associations of North America is a live, vibrant, constructive and democratic organization. Why should FPZAI be any different?