Archive

"In need of charity”
The group that had earlier met the trustees on October 5 was then called in around 7.15 p.m. Viraf explained that as around 60 days’ notice is required to hold an election the earliest it could be held would be around January 2022, just eight months prior to the next elections due in October that same year.  So in order to save money and effort it made more sense to hold one election for five seats in October 2022. This way the trustees could "amend the scheme in totality.” He also cited the August 2 standard operating procedures (SOPs) by the State Government that he alleged forbade elections being held. Hoshang Jal, honorary secretary of the Cusrow Baug United Sports and Welfare League and a leading trusteeship contender disputed this stating, "The order is not applicable to Bombay…Elections are not banned.” Election campaign meetings face bans/restrictions. Elections were being held or scheduled elsewhere in the state. Regarding the financial crunch cited as a reason for not holding the election this year, Jal noted, "You gave your promise to the Bombay High Court (BHC). It has no meaning…Now you say you have no money… to elect trustees to amend the scheme. It has come to this…A body that is supposed to do charity is in need of charity.”
Commenting on the BPP cash crunch, Randeria said the Mehta camp wanted to pay Rs 28 lakhs out of the 1.2 crore rupees owed to A. H. Wadia Baug on Parel Tank Road in Kalachowki. The money is half of the 20% share the BPP and the Baug receives for transfer of ownership flats. The BPP has been holding on to the full amount as it is short of funds. The three A. H. Wadia Baug representatives who came to meet the trustees said the money was required for urgent repairs and maintenance of the buildings. Randeria noted crores of rupees had not been disbursed to BPP baug tenants for their 50% share paid for repairs, mobed and second and third child subsidies, doles, etc. Randeria and Dadrawala, however, were agreeable to paying half the transfer fee amounting to Rs 14 lakhs.
When Tirandaz was asked regarding the board’s decision as to when the next election would be held, she replied the trustees had not discussed the issue as the earlier group had taken up the time they had allocated for the discussion. The group then left the room for around 40 minutes to allow the trustees to discuss the issue and reach a decision.
At 9.15 p.m. when they reconvened Tirandaz stated, "We are prepared to hold elections in October 2022 and move for amending the trustees’ term from seven to five years.” No other reforms to the scheme were proposed. Since the vote was split equally between the four trustees with Tirandaz exercising the casting vote, Randeria lamented: "Only two trustees decided on this crucial issue.” 
 "The changing of the scheme cannot be grounds for delaying the elections,” stated Jal. As the discussion grew more heated, Tirandaz called the meeting to a close.
"I am impotent in this board. I am useless,” blurted Dadrawala. "The majority decision binds me. But I can’t be part of it. We are in breach of the scheme. I do not want to be part of this board…This bloody chair is jinxed.”

Initial meet
Faced with 12 animated community activists on October 5 demanding to know when the BPP intended to hold the thrice delayed trusteeship election for two vacancies, Tirandaz replied she needed "to ponder” on the issue. "I’ve heard you all. I’ll think about it and come back,” she stated in the BPP boardroom. When pressed for a time bound commitment she agreed to October 12, the next weekly meeting of the board.
Of the five trustees only three, Tirandaz, Randeria and Viraf were present. Dadrawala and Dastur were absent. Tirandaz was handed a three-page       letter signed by 16 community activists, including two top trusteeship contenders. The letter noted that one of the two seats on the seven-member trustee board had been lying vacant for over a year. BPP trustee Zarir Bhathena died in June 2020 and Yazdi Desai stepped down as chairman in December of the same year on account of ill health.
"The scheme of election clearly states that an election to fill the vacancy of a trustee shall be held in not less than 28 days and not more than three months from the date when such vacancy has occurred… The trustees are not above the law; due process needs to be followed,” the letter states.
The three majority trustees, Tirandaz, Viraf and Dastur, want "to approach the High Court to amend the election scheme with regard to just one single point of reducing the term of office of the trustees from seven years to five years…
"It is very blatantly clear that this talk of approaching the High Court for reducing the tenure of a trustee is nothing but a ploy to delay the election for the two vacant seats. The board needs to stop trying to fool the community under the guise of amending the scheme.”
The letter recommends all the trustees who have already completed five years in office should step down and elections be held for all the vacant seats (four of the five sitting trustees have completed five years — editors): "This will not only help put all present acrimonies aside, bring immediate peace in the community but also monetarily benefit the community by saving on the cost of repeated elections.”
The group had wanted to video record the interaction but Viraf objected. Jal said the recording was "in the interests of all concerned. You know how things get twisted.” Viraf noted the board meetings are recorded as per a BHC directive. Jal asked for a copy of the recording. "We will find out if we can give,” replied Tirandaz. Jal then asked for "a clarification on a burning issue: When will the BPP elections be held” and whether the BHC had sanctioned the decision. As the BPP election scheme was framed by the BHC, any changes have to be sanctioned by the Court. Five months had passed since the Court had been moved to delay the scheduled May 2021 elections. What is the present position? asked Jal. Randeria interjected that he and Dadrawala had moved a petition before a division bench of the BHC that had heard the earlier motion to hold the elections, but were referred to a single bench judge.
Regarding the majority trustees’ move to approach the Court for reducing a trustee’s term from seven to five years, Randeria was told the matter could be decided in two months so there would not be much delay in holding the elections thereafter. When Randeria asked the trustee (presumably Viraf) which lawyers he had spoken to, he received vague replies such as "‘My lawyer friend told me this.’ There is no name, nothing in writing.” [At the October 12 meeting Viraf named Berjis as the lawyer who gave the written advice. When Parsiana contacted Berjis  to confirm Viraf’s statement, the jurist replied the filing would take four months. "However I also categorically stated that these two things (elections and reforms) are entirely separate and there is no need to stop the elections while the process of amendments were ongoing” — editors] Leading BPP trusteeship contender Anahita remarked, "Everyone knows legal decisions take more than two months.” Randeria inquired why the trustees intended to approach the Court "with only one suggestion. We have to modify the scheme. What about the code of conduct? Electronic voting?” He alleged the reason the majority trustees wanted to delay the elections was "to make sure the people who are likely to be elected trustees are kept out… The trustees want to keep the board to five” so they remain in a three-to-two majority. The trio owes allegiance to Dinshaw who is believed to call the shots.
"Why are you asking for the reforms now?” inquired Jal. "All trustees who have completed five years can step down. The court petition will drag on for seven to eight months. The intention is not to hold the elections.”
The pandemic could no longer be an excuse for the delay. Much of the "community is vaccinated,” said activist Karyesh Patel. Referring to the lack of communication from the BPP board on community issues, activist Arzan Ghadially said there was "no transparency. There has to be some communication from the BPP.” "We don’t know the opinion of the board,” said Jal. "We are being taken for a ride. Follow the scheme of elections. You cannot decide, only the High Court can.”
"The idea is to keep the right candidates out,” added Randeria. "We are bound by law to follow the scheme. We are not doing so.” He said he and Dadrawala were prepared to step down but the other three may not. Since they constitute "a quorum of three, they may continue. They are so thick-skinned.”
"Why are you not following the law? She (Tirandaz) knows she is not following the law,” said WAPIZ trustee Meher Panthaki. Said activist Ketayun Daji, "She can’t just sit like this” not giving a specific answer to the queries. Disappointed that Tirandaz would not commit to a date at the meeting, activist Rukshana Delkhah said, "I’m ready to come next Tuesday. But doesn’t our time have any value? We all go to work. We have to attend PTA (parent-teacher association meetings) at school. We have to deal” with workmen for household repairs and maintenance. The group had come to the BPP office on the third floor of the Sir J. J. Parsee Benevolent Institution before 5 p.m. They were called into the boardroom at 7.25 and left an hour later.
The PT which is owned by Randeria, titled its front page story on October 9, "Tarikh Pe Tarikh Pe Tarikh (Date after date after date)!!!” While the subhead questioned, "Why are BPP Elections For 2 Vacant Seats Being Constantly Postponed???” The Dinshaw camp’s online Parsi Junction (PJ) of October 10 responded with a headline, "Ego vs death in the times of Covid: The truth behind why BPP elections are postponed.” The front page article alleged the SOPs did not permit the holding of elections (they can be held subject to certain precautions — editors) and referred to "restrictions on election rallies and meetings. Hence the board decided to move the elections to the end of November.” PJ also alleged those who signed the letter and attended the October 5 meeting were "paid community activists…Many are either indebted or are being protected from legal action.”