Editorial Viewpoint
The fire within
A flurry of activity characterized the second month of 2007 as it did the first.
Perhaps the most perplexing occurrence was an inexplicable fire in the Bisney Dakhma on the Doongerwadi grounds managed by the Bombay Parsi Punchayet.
The flames that reportedly leapt as high as two storeys (from the base of the bhandar) appeared to indicate to some that even the overburdened, foul smelling, corpse strewn dakhmas were crying out for a crematorium of sorts.
Perhaps divine forces were causing the Vendidad injunction that all dakhmas should be demolished after 50 years of existence to become a reality.
Or maybe it was just an accumulation of dry leaves and dead wood that broke out in angry flames, heated by the solar concentrators or the sun reflecting off the mirrors. Why were the fire gods angry? Were they upset that four BPP trustees had rescinded the resolution to permit the bunglis to be used for funeral prayers for those opting for alternate means of disposal to dakhmenashini? Or were the dakhmas, groaning under continuous use and abuse, unhappy that alternate methods are discouraged resulting in mounting pressure?
Or perhaps the gods were upset at the reported backroom maneuvers of the trustees and their orthodox supporters to renege on their commitment to introduce universal adult franchise.
With the new Anjuman Committee allegedly packed with WAPIZ (The World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) supporters, three of the trustees, viewed as sympathetic to the orthodox body, may initiate such a move fear community watchers.
On the assumption that adult franchise would be introduced, most political activists barring WAPIZ avoided submitting lists of candidates for the Anjuman Committee elections under the existing scheme.
If more than the required number of candidates had enrolled, elections would have to be held to elect 2,336 members! It was this absurdity that motivated the BPP trustees to seek the Bombay High Court’s consent to introduce voting rights for all Zoroastrians to directly elect trustees.
If they reconsider their decision to introduce universal franchise the trustees would be committing a breach of faith.
Alternatively they may pursue adult franchise but attempt to withdraw their offer of resigning once fresh elections are held. Their purported resignations were a sop to their critics to prevent further legal action to oust them. The WAPIZ brigade however went ahead and filed their petition in the Bombay High Court before Justice Roshan Dalvi claiming a resignation once given cannot be withdrawn. On a legal technicality, Dalvi rejected their application. Meanwhile the Alert Zoroastrians Association (AZA) filed their petition in the charity commissioner’s office seeking to oust all the six trustees but have kept matters on hold to see what developments take place.
AZA has reportedly cited the allegations the trustees had made against each other at the time of the mid-2006 resignation fiasco to bolster their case.
The rescinding of the resolution passed in February 2001 permitting use of the bunglis to those opting for alternative modes was an unnecessary and thoughtless act, much like the ill conceived resignations.
Both actions had been caused by Press articles/editorials attacking the trustees. In the case of the resignations it was a write-up in the Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly over allocation of two flats to a family while in the second case the furor was over a column by noted solicitor and The Bombay Samachar columnist Berjis Desai claiming the trustees were threatening to rescind the bungli resolution in light of the impending originating summons to be filed in the Bombay High Court. The petition signed by former BPP chairman Dr Aspi Golwalla, former BPP trustee and former municipal commissioner of Bombay Jamsheed Kanga and former Glaxo managing director and current Tata director Homi Khusrokhan seeks th
Perhaps the most perplexing occurrence was an inexplicable fire in the Bisney Dakhma on the Doongerwadi grounds managed by the Bombay Parsi Punchayet.
The flames that reportedly leapt as high as two storeys (from the base of the bhandar) appeared to indicate to some that even the overburdened, foul smelling, corpse strewn dakhmas were crying out for a crematorium of sorts.
Perhaps divine forces were causing the Vendidad injunction that all dakhmas should be demolished after 50 years of existence to become a reality.
Or maybe it was just an accumulation of dry leaves and dead wood that broke out in angry flames, heated by the solar concentrators or the sun reflecting off the mirrors. Why were the fire gods angry? Were they upset that four BPP trustees had rescinded the resolution to permit the bunglis to be used for funeral prayers for those opting for alternate means of disposal to dakhmenashini? Or were the dakhmas, groaning under continuous use and abuse, unhappy that alternate methods are discouraged resulting in mounting pressure?
Or perhaps the gods were upset at the reported backroom maneuvers of the trustees and their orthodox supporters to renege on their commitment to introduce universal adult franchise.
With the new Anjuman Committee allegedly packed with WAPIZ (The World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) supporters, three of the trustees, viewed as sympathetic to the orthodox body, may initiate such a move fear community watchers.
On the assumption that adult franchise would be introduced, most political activists barring WAPIZ avoided submitting lists of candidates for the Anjuman Committee elections under the existing scheme.
If more than the required number of candidates had enrolled, elections would have to be held to elect 2,336 members! It was this absurdity that motivated the BPP trustees to seek the Bombay High Court’s consent to introduce voting rights for all Zoroastrians to directly elect trustees.
If they reconsider their decision to introduce universal franchise the trustees would be committing a breach of faith.
Alternatively they may pursue adult franchise but attempt to withdraw their offer of resigning once fresh elections are held. Their purported resignations were a sop to their critics to prevent further legal action to oust them. The WAPIZ brigade however went ahead and filed their petition in the Bombay High Court before Justice Roshan Dalvi claiming a resignation once given cannot be withdrawn. On a legal technicality, Dalvi rejected their application. Meanwhile the Alert Zoroastrians Association (AZA) filed their petition in the charity commissioner’s office seeking to oust all the six trustees but have kept matters on hold to see what developments take place.
AZA has reportedly cited the allegations the trustees had made against each other at the time of the mid-2006 resignation fiasco to bolster their case.
The rescinding of the resolution passed in February 2001 permitting use of the bunglis to those opting for alternative modes was an unnecessary and thoughtless act, much like the ill conceived resignations.
Both actions had been caused by Press articles/editorials attacking the trustees. In the case of the resignations it was a write-up in the Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly over allocation of two flats to a family while in the second case the furor was over a column by noted solicitor and The Bombay Samachar columnist Berjis Desai claiming the trustees were threatening to rescind the bungli resolution in light of the impending originating summons to be filed in the Bombay High Court. The petition signed by former BPP chairman Dr Aspi Golwalla, former BPP trustee and former municipal commissioner of Bombay Jamsheed Kanga and former Glaxo managing director and current Tata director Homi Khusrokhan seeks th
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive