Mehli Mistry Battles Removal from Tata Trusts, Demands Governance Probe
Mehli Mistry seeks an independent inquiry into Tata Trusts governance, alleging procedural lapses and conflicts of interest.
In a significant legal escalation, Mehli Mistry has formally challenged his removal as a trustee of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT) and the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution. Filing a series of rejoinders and applications before the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, Mistry has alleged severe procedural irregularities and blatant violations of trust governance rules.
Questioning the Legality of the Removal
At the heart of Mistry's challenge is the legality of the decisions that led to his exit. He has questioned the eligibility of certain trustees and their right to participate in the decision-making process regarding his reappointment.
A primary point of contention involves Venu Srinivasan. Mistry argues that Srinivasan’s tenure as a trustee had already ended on October 23, 2025. Despite this, Srinivasan reportedly communicated a vote against Mistry's reappointment on October 28. Mistry points out that the trust's own records contained a footnote stating that Srinivasan's vote should be disregarded because he was no longer a trustee.
However, Mistry contends that simply removing the vote from the final count is insufficient. He argues that the entire resolution is invalid because the body that considered his reappointment was not properly constituted, as Srinivasan was still involved in the process.
The Tenure Dispute
Mistry has also disputed the trust's claim that his three-year tenure expired on October 28, 2025, which the trust used as the basis for requiring a fresh resolution for his reappointment. To counter this, Mistry has cited the SDTT Trust Deed of March 11, 1932, asserting that the deed does not actually prescribe a fixed tenure for trustees.
Furthermore, he relies on a joint resolution from October 17, 2024, between SDTT and the Sir Ratan Tata Trust, which allowed for the reappointment of trustees upon the expiry of their terms without any limitation on the renewed term, provided it complied with applicable laws.
Eligibility and Citizenship Concerns
The battle extends to the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution, where Mistry has raised questions about the eligibility of current trustees. He cites provisions in the trust deed requiring trustees to profess the Parsi Zoroastrian faith and meet specific residency conditions.
- Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh: Mistry has questioned their eligibility based on these specific deed requirements.
- Noel Tata: Mistry has raised concerns regarding Noel Tata's alleged UAE residency and Irish citizenship, arguing that eligibility rules must be applied uniformly to all trustees.
Mistry has requested that the Charity Commissioner seek affidavits from all trustees to confirm they meet the qualifications prescribed under the trust deed, rejecting the trust's stance that these provisions are unenforceable.
Allegations of Financial Irregularities and Conflicts of Interest
Beyond his own removal, Mistry is seeking a comprehensive independent inquiry into the administration of SDTT. He has alleged conflicts of interest and the improper retention of financial benefits by trustees.
Key Financial Allegations:
- Nominee Director Commissions: Mistry has questioned commissions received by trustees serving as nominee directors in Tata Group companies. He specifically pointed to corporate filings showing that Noel Tata received an annual commission of approximately Rs 1.42 crore from Tata Sons Private Limited during FY 2024-25.
- Corporate Decisions: He has raised red flags over the engagement of Gerry McGovern for Norton Motorcycles and the equity infusion into Tata International Limited.
- Voting Discrepancies: Mistry alleges there were deviations from unanimous resolutions regarding how the trust's shareholding in Tata Sons was voted.
Mistry argues that these actions may constitute breaches of fiduciary duties. He has urged the Charity Commissioner to inspect board records, declarations of interest, and corporate filings under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, and has requested that the preliminary objections raised by SDTT be rejected.