MUMBAI: The power struggle within the Tata Trusts is intensifying. In the latest development, Venu Srinivasan, the senior-most vice-chairman of the trusts and a director on Tata Sons’ board, has resigned from the Hirabai Tata Trust.
His resignation came within hours of reports that former trustee Mehli Mistry had moved the Charity Commissioner, seeking the ouster of Srinivasan and another vice chairman, Vijay Singh, from the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution on the grounds that they are non-Parsis.
While Mistry's petition pertains to this relatively lesser-known trust, its implications could extend to over a dozen entities within the Tata Trusts ecosystem.
In his petition, Mistry has also challenged his own ouster from the trusts last October, arguing that the votes cast by Srinivasan and Singh—who he claims were ineligible—should be deemed invalid.
Mistry had earlier challenged his removal before the Charity Commissioner in November but withdrew the plea within a week and resigned, stating he no longer had any interest in the trusts.
Srinivasan, chairman emeritus of TVS Motor and vice chairman of several Tata Trusts, reportedly stepped down from the Navsari, Gujarat-based trust on Saturday, citing "preoccupation with other business commitments".
Earlier this week, he assumed charge as chairman and managing director of Sundaram Clayton following a family split within the TVS Group.
Tata Trusts, Srinivasan, and Mistry did not respond to requests for comment.
The Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution was established in 1923 by Sir Ratanji Tata, son of group founder Jamsetji Tata. The trust focuses on the welfare of the Parsi community in Navsari, Gujarat, particularly in education and healthcare. It is part of the broader Tata Trusts network and shares trustees with the Sir Ratan Tata Trust, one of the two principal trusts that together control a majority stake in Tata Sons.
According to sources, Mistry—who was removed last October after objections to his reappointment—has filed an application before the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner, arguing that Srinivasan and Singh did not meet the eligibility criteria, particularly the requirement of being Parsis, and should therefore be disqualified.
Mistry, a former trustee and close associate of the late Ratan Tata, has also questioned the validity of their votes against his reappointment, reiterating that they were not eligible to serve as trustees.
He has invoked clauses 6 and 18 of the trust deed, which mandate that trustees must be of the Parsi-Zoroastrian faith and permanent residents within the Bombay Presidency–Navsari jurisdiction.
Mistry has sought a suo motu inquiry by the Charity Commissioner and has asked that all trustees be directed to file affidavits confirming their eligibility. He has also levelled allegations of fraud, cheating, criminal breach of trust, maladministration, mismanagement, and misrepresentation against Srinivasan and Singh.
Earlier, Mistry had raised governance concerns within the trusts. In February last year, while serving as a trustee of the Tata Education and Development Trust, he questioned the role of vice chairmen, noting that the trust deed does not provide for such a position.