Mehli makes his move, files caveat on his ouster
According to executive information regarding the development, Mistry on Friday issued notices against his removal from Sir Ratan Tata Foundation, Sir Dorabji Tata Foundation and another allied foundation, Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Navsari Charitable Trust.
Tata Trusts owns 65.9% of Tata Sons, the holding company of the Tata Group, which has 26 listed companies valued at over $300 billion.
The Charity Commissioner of Maharashtra regulates all appointment and removal of trustees in trusts in the state and his approval is required for a decision to come into force. When Tata Trusts sent its decision to remove Mistry from the board of trustees to the Charity Commissioner, a warning obliges the authority to hear Mistry’s plea.
Is it a long case?
Unless a decision is reached quickly, this development could be the beginning of a lengthy legal case that could hinder decisions taken by the Tata Trusts and ultimately affect the operations of Tata Sons, the holding company of the Tata Group.
This is because Tata Sons has many decisions, including induction of board members and over-investment. ₹100 crore, Tata Trusts’ approval is required as per Tata Sons’ articles of association.
An email sent to Mistry seeking comment remained unanswered.
Alay Razvi, managing partner of law firm Accord Juris, explained that when a tip is made to the Charity Commissioner, this creates a legal obligation for the Commissioner to notify and hear the tipster (in this case Mistry) before making any order. In simple terms, it prevents the Commissioner from approving Tata Trusts’ decision without allowing Mistry to present his defence.
What does reporting mean?
However, filing a notice alone does not stop or suspend ongoing regulatory proceedings or trustee functions; it only ensures procedural fairness and the right to be heard.
“Unless the whistleblower specifically receives interim relief, the administrative or corporate functioning of the parent company will continue unaffected,” Razvi said. “Only if the notice involves questions directly affecting the trustee’s control or management may restraining orders be sought as a result,” he added.
Elaborating on the process, Supreme Court lawyer B. Shravanth Shanker noted that although notice requires a hearing within days or weeks, if the issue becomes moot (which is likely in the current case), the process can take months or longer, including appeals and writs.
“If either party seeks interim relief or files a lawsuit in court, the dispute may extend into protracted litigation. Official instructions recognize timelines and also provide for disposal norms, but practice shows that matters can be protracted,” Shanker said.
“The results depend largely on the facts, whether the removal of the trustee was procedurally flawed, whether legal prerequisites were followed, and whether immediate interim relief is justified,” Shanker said.
Running towards the department
Mistry, a Mumbai-based businessman and confidant of the late Ratan Tata (he was even the executor of Tata’s will and also the beneficiary), was removed from the board of trustees after Tata Trusts chairman Noel Tata and two vice-chairmen Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh opposed his appointment as permanent trustee on October 28.
The decision to remove Mistry surprised the Parsi community as well as Ratan Tata’s two half-sisters, Shireen and Deanna Jejeebhoy; In their first media interview with Mint, they said they were disturbed by the turmoil at Tata Trusts, describing Mehli Mistry’s sacking last week as an act of retaliation by other trustees.
The genesis of the split within Tata Trusts began when Noel Tata took over as chairman of Tata Trusts on October 11 last year, less than 48 hours after the death of Ratan Tata. Noel Tata was appointed as the board nominee of Tata Trusts on 17 October 2024. Thus, Noel became Tata Trusts’ third nominee on the Tata Sons board, after Srinivasan and Singh.
Four non-candidate Tata Trustees, including former Citibank India CEO Pramit Jhaveri, Mumbai-based lawyer Darius Khambata, Pune-based businessman Jehangir HC Jehangir and Mehli Mistry, have begun questioning whether their representatives on the Tata Sons board were sharing with them the decisions taken by the holding company’s board. They believed that two classes of Trustees existed: the nominee directors, who had information, and the remaining trustees, who did not.
After more than 11 months of tensions, four trustees reviewed Singh’s performance at the Sept. 11 board meeting. Noel and Srinivasan wanted Singh to continue; Mistry, Jhaveri, Khambata and Jehngair did not.
The die was cast; Singh was removed from the Tata Sons board as Tata Trusts’ nominee.
On September 24, Mint He explained what happened at the September 11 board meeting.
Less than 50 days after the September 11 meeting, Noel, Singh and Srinivasan opposed Mistry’s continuation as trustee, deepening the infighting.
