The Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT), the largest shareholder in Tata Sons, has been given an additional week, until October 19, to respond to complaints filed by two of its trustees, Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh, alleging governance irregularities and “interference” in the affairs of the Tata Group’s holding company.
SDTT sought more time on Monday to respond to queries raised by the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, a Tata Trusts spokesperson said. The trust had rejected the allegations in a letter dated October 5, signed by trustees including Noel N Tata, his son Neville Tata, former Titan Company chief executive Bhaskar Bhat and lawyer Darius Khambata.
In the letter, Noel questioned the complaints filed by Srinivasan and Singh, pointing out that both trustees had approached the charity commissioner seeking restrictions on SDTT’s decision-making process even before raising concerns about the need for collective deliberations.
“We find it difficult, however, to reconcile the concern expressed in your letter, that SDTT should act only after deliberation at meetings of its trustees, with the complaints which each of you sent to the Charity Commissioner by e-mail on 25 September 2026, five days before your letter, in identical terms, asking that SDTT be directed not to convene, hold or act through any meeting or circular resolution until further orders,” Noel wrote.
What Venu Srinivasan alleged
In his complaint, Srinivasan raised concerns about the trust’s involvement in Tata Sons’ commercial affairs. He also questioned Noel Tata’s perpetual trusteeship, his position as chairman of Tata Trusts and his role in key decisions.
Srinivasan specifically objected to a circular resolution dated September 16, which allegedly sought to prevent him, as a nominee director jointly appointed by SDTT and the Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT), from participating in or voting on the proposed listing of Tata Sons, as per ANI.
Explaining his objection, Srinivasan wrote, “On September 16, 2026, SDTT circulated Circular Resolution No. 107 seeking to restrain me, in my capacity as a nominee director on the Board of Tata Sons, jointly appointed by SRTT and SDTT, from participating in or voting on the proposed listing of Tata Sons.”
He alleged that the resolution was aimed at consolidating control within the trust.
“More fundamentally, it was an attempt to effect a power grab within SDTT and, through it, to dictate what Tata Sons should do instead of allowing its Board to objectively evaluate the available alternatives on their merits,” he wrote.
Srinivasan further claimed that the trusts’ participation in commercial activities could jeopardise SDTT’s charitable status and tax exemptions.
“The Trustees are therefore exposing the Trust and its charitable corpus to potentially immense fiscal consequences by involving the Trust directly in commercial activities which may not be incidental to its charitable objects,” he wrote.
He called for an inquiry and sought action against the trustees if the allegations were established. He also requested interim restrictions on Noel Tata’s participation in certain decisions concerning the trust and Tata Sons, along with a suspension of SDTT meetings and circular resolutions relating to its administration until the inquiry was completed.
What Vijay Singh alleged
In his email dated September 25, Singh called for an immediate inquiry into SDTT’s governance. He argued that the trust’s growing involvement in Tata Sons’ commercial and strategic decisions could put its charitable status at risk and expose its assets to significant tax liabilities.
“A matter of serious concern is the increasing involvement of SDTT and Tata Trusts in the commercial and strategic affairs of Tata Sons Private Limited,” Singh wrote.
He referred to two statements issued by Tata Trusts on September 17, concerning the proposed listing of Tata Sons and a plan to provide liquidity to the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) Group. The first statement said SDTT and SRTT had decided in July 2025 that Tata Sons should remain unlisted, according to ANI.
The second outlined a proposal put forward by Noel Tata to the Tata Sons board to facilitate monetisation of the SP Group’s shareholding. The proposed options included a two-stage buyout, selective capital reduction through the National Company Law Tribunal and other financing arrangements.
Singh alleged that the trusts were directly involved in identifying and negotiating major commercial transactions, which could put their tax-exempt status in jeopardy.
He also raised objections to a circular resolution reportedly issued by SDTT on September 16, which he alleged was intended to bar Srinivasan, a nominee director appointed jointly by SRTT and SDTT, from taking part in or voting on the proposed listing of Tata Sons.
He claimed the resolution was intended to curb Srinivasan’s independent decision-making and centralise authority among a smaller group of trustees.
Singh called for scrutiny of trustee appointments, Noel Tata’s position as chairman of Tata Trusts and Neville Tata’s appointment. He also sought an inquiry into the trust’s governance and its involvement in Tata Sons’ commercial decisions.