The traditionalists who control The Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India (FPZAI) ensured the all-India body voted to intervene in the Originating Summons filed by Calcutta residents Prochy Mehta and Sanaya Mehta Vyas. Even with a brutal majority, FPZAI president and Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) chairman Yazdi Desai chose to resort to clause 35 of the rules and regulations that entitles him to bar discussion. He invokes the clause when any discussion is not to his liking. Barring the last 10 years or so, an open forum has always been a prominent characteristic of the body. People could speak their minds without fear or favor. But in today’s times where expressing your point of view or following your beliefs can result in abuse, boycotts and sometimes bloodshed, even the Federation is not immune to the forces of intolerance and parochialism.
The current issue arose over two ladies inquiring of the Calcutta High Court as to who has the right of entry to the Late Dhunjeebhoy Byramjee Mehta’s Zoroastrian Anjuman Atash Adaran. The Calcutta agiary trustees oppose the entry of children of a Parsi mother married to a non Parsi (see "The concept of gender equality," Parsiana July 21, 2017). Several in the West Bengal anjuman are also opposed to the entry of such children.
At the agiary’s annual general meeting on August 23, 2015 sentiments were expressed for and against admission (see "To be inclusive or exclusive," Parsiana August 7, 2017). The local panthaky has also strongly opposed the entry. Others at the meetings voiced apprehension the priests may leave the agiary if a change was introduced, never mind that the earlier panthaky permitted the children entry. Some voiced fear the community would split with the breakaway faction creating their own institutions.
The Calcutta residents have been wrestling with the issue over the past several years. The Adaran trustees could have easily called for a referendum as the Delhi Parsi Anjuman did years ago and evoked the Saklat vs Bella judgment that permits the trustees discretion as to who to admit. But the Calcutta trustees preferred to let the issue fester. They had perhaps not counted on the determination of two Parsi women to fight for their rights. After all, for nearly 110 years, women have refrained from moving the courts. Why should it be different now?
But as women from other communities take up cudgels to enforce their rights, Parsi women too realized that unless they fought the good fight, they would continue to languish as second class citizens.
The FPZAI executive council of 16 that voted to intervene comprised of 15 males and only one woman. The lady who favored intervention represented Jabalpur which has a Parsi population of under 30. In West Zone B, Nargol which has a Parsi population of around 35 has a seat in the council while Baroda with a population of over 900 is excluded. Of the 14 who voted for the resolution, four represented anjumans while the other voters were FPZAI office bearers and co-opted members. The Delhi representative abstained from voting as did the Iranian Zoroastrian Anjuman delegate. One would have expected Delhi to have opposed the resolution but they too have to contend with growing orthodoxy in their ranks.
BPP trustee Viraf Mehta who favored the Federation’s intervention inquired at the July 30, 2017 meet as to how the litigation would be funded. The reply was, from the funds received from the sale of defunct anjuman properties. How far will the amount go in a case that will be fought in the High Court before a single judge, then a division bench and finally the Supreme Court?
If the Federation is not satisfied with the counsel appointed by the Adaran trustees, they will hire high profile lawyers. The stakes are great especially after the humiliating defeat in the priests ban case. The two priests are barred from performing religious ceremonies at Doongerwadi and two fire temples managed by the BPP but the Bombay High Court judgment saying as per the trust deed the trustees cannot interfere in religious matters stands. Another setback after squandering crores of rupees would be a major loss of face. Bravado comes at a high price. Should, for any reason, the Calcutta trust exhaust its funds after the first round, the full burden of litigation would have to be borne by the penniless Federation.
In the report of 14 defunct anjumans for the year 2016-2017 submitted by West Zone B vice president Sam Chothia at the FPZAI meet on April 29 and 30 this year, there is no mention of sales being concluded or money realized. His report states five percent of the sale proceeds from the Dharwar cemetery lands "will be given to the Dharwar Anjuman to maintain the graves/tombstones." Of the remaining, 95% "will be utilized for the betterment of the Parsi Zoroastrian community with first preference being given to the residents of Dharwar, Belgaum and surrounding areas."
The body’s estimated income and expenditure statement for 2016-2017 shows "nil" realization from disposal of assets. Annual interest on investments is Rs 1,70,000 and "other revenue receipts Rs 30,000." Hardly a war chest to fund legal battles. The priests ban case filed by the BPP cost over three crore rupees and that was a couple of years ago. The costs would have increased significantly since then. The FPZAI would need a kitty of around four crore rupees to fund the fight.
Would Mehta and his co-trustee Armaity Tirandaz who favors intervention agree to the BPP funding the fight? Unlikely. Trustees Noshir Dadrawala, Kersi Randeria and Zarir Bhathena oppose intervention. So where will the funds come from? As it is, the BPP finds it difficult to distribute doles on time and is always bemoaning its financial crunch.
Will the community condone so much money meant for welfare to be used to fight against the rights of women and children? There will be a section that says fight on, the religion is in danger (though what is threatened is only racism and sexism). But will they fund the battle?
In the Goolrookh Gupta case, business tycoon Areez Khambatta is said to finance the Valsad Parsi Anjuman. Will the FPZAI find a similar sugar daddy?
Passing resolutions in a body packed with your supporters is easy. Financing a bigoted cause may prove a more difficult task.