Tata Trusts affirms its faith in the CEO; it will review restrictive clauses that limit eligibility in the smaller trust

Tata Trusts on Sunday said it plans to amend restrictive clauses that currently limit eligibility for trustee positions at an affiliate trust to Zoroastrians, even as it affirmed confidence in chief executive officer (CEO) Siddharth Sharma. This follows public questions raised by vice chairmen Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh, after Sharma asked them if they would consider stepping down as trustees at the affiliate trust.

“In order to correct anomalies in the trust deed and to align it with the values that the Tata Trusts have always epitomised, the trustees have decided to adopt proceedings before the appropriate authority for alteration of restrictive clauses in respect of eligibility of trustees. The trustees also reiterated their full faith and confidence in the chief executive officer and his administrative stewardship of the Tata Trusts,” Tata Trusts said in a statement.

After a meeting of the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable board on Friday, Tata Trusts said its ethos is inclusive, secular, all-encompassing, and focused on philanthropy and national service.

The specific steps will pursue to amend the eligibility rules for trustees of the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Institution remain unclear, including whether it will involve a court or the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner.

The Tata Trusts’ plan to amend the restrictive clauses follows a challenge by former trustee Mehli Mistry. Earlier this month, Mistry, who was ousted from Tata Trusts last year, challenged the eligibility of the vice chairmen to serve as trustees at Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution. In an affidavit, Mistry argued that Srinivasan and Singh are neither Zoroastrians nor do they live in Mumbai—conditions Mistry says are necessary to be a trustee.

Both Sirinivasan and Singh are vice chairmen of the Tata Trusts, the umbrella philanthropic entity that owns 65.9% of , the holding company of the Tata Group.



Sir Dorabji Tata Trusts (SDTT) and Sir Ratan Tata Trusts (SRTT) hold 27.98% and 23.56%, while other smaller Trusts own the remaining 14.36%. SDTT runs nine smaller Trusts while SRTT runs five trusts, including Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution.

A day before Mistry filed his affidavit with the state charity commissioner, TVS chair emeritus Venu Srinivasan stepped down from the smaller trusts, while former defence secretary Vijay Singh did not. This came after Sharma, CEO since April 2023, asked if they vice chairmen would consider stepping down voluntarily.

Subsequently, both Srinivasan and Singh accused Sharma of bias, stating that he did not share with them a 26-year-old legal opinion rebutting the eligibility condition.

Sharma, in his letter, wrote that he and Tata Trusts chair believed that the legal opinion—which effectively supports the continuance of Srinivasan and Singh on the Bai Hirabai trust—did not substitute for a court order; and, to avoid a potential dispute, they decided to ask Srinivasan and Singh if they wanted to voluntarily step down.

“So now, the Tata Trusts could approach the state charity commissioner and go to a court to have the original deed (of Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable) amended,” said senior Supreme Court lawyer H.P. Ranina. “But what this development also shows is that Mehli Mistry’s challenge of non-Parsis as trustees on this trust was correct”.

In an interview with The Economic Times earlier this month, Singh said the CEO Sharma’s action indicated “seriously flawed governance and an implicit bias against the two trustees.”

“I, thereafter, discussed this with the chairman, Tata Trusts on April 02, 2026, and both of us felt that irrespective of the legal opinion and past precedent, it was open to anyone to question the appointments of non-Zoroastrians made to the Trust, in view of the specific clauses contained in the Trust Deed,” Sharma wrote in his letter dated 7 April. “It was our considered opinion that a legal opinion per se does not substitute for a judicial pronouncement. In that light, and in good faith, the chairman requested me to speak to both Mr. Vijay Singh and Mr. , apprise them of the situation and ask them if they would like to voluntarily step down from the said Trust.”

Source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

eighteen − sixteen =