Editorial Viewpoint
To hold on, hoard or hive off?
Two recent controversies have raised a very fundamental issue that confronts all community charitable trusts. Does one utilize trust property for commercial gain?
The subject once again arose recently when the proposed sale of the Parsi Lying-In Hospital was publicly mooted and subsequently the issue snowballed over the erection of a hoarding at the entrance to the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) Doongerwadi estate. In both cases, the argument put forth by the trustees is that utilization of assets for financial benefit is not inimical to the larger interests of the community.
The Parsi Lying-In Hospital in the Fort area, the first such hospital in the country, has not been functional for several years. This is an understandable predicament allowing for the dearth of Zoroastrian babies being born and the shift of the Parsi population to the suburbs. Private maternity homes in the vicinity of peoples’ residences are more convenient for deliveries than commuting long distances.
In earlier times women remained in confinement for 40 days after delivery. Maternity hospitals were then a much needed requirement. But today when women return home after a few days’ stay, the hospital rooms are underutilized. Aside from housing an office of Parsiana, the hospital is vacant.
So the managing committee and the owners of the property, the BPP considered selling the property to The Cathedral and John Connon School situated across the road from the hospital. Being one of the most reputed educational institutions in Bombay, no one could doubt the bonafides of the trustees in agreeing to a proposal of around 35 crore rupees.
But the question arose not of financial impropriety but rather why sell the building? Why not develop the property for community use? Why not create another home for the aged? Why not use the premises to house the BPP office as it is contesting an eviction notice from its landlord, the the Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Parsee Benevolent Institution trust.
A flurry of e-mails crisscrossed the community grapevine with ideas and suggestions. While people differed on what to do, nearly all were against an outright sale. Community property, they argued, should remain community property.
As for forsaking the princely sum, people inquired why 35 crores was required and what the BPP intended to do with the monies. Build more houses? Doubtful because land is not easily available and the Bombay Parsi population is dwindling by around 500 to 600 a year. The Zoroastrian population in the metropolis has almost halved since 1940.
In regard to the Doongerwadi hoarding imbroglio, the BPP cited a deficit of over a crore of rupees annually as their rationale for permitting a double billboard being erected on the cemetery land. Around 1973, BPP trustee Shiavax R. Vakil mooted the idea of placing hoardings at Doongerwadi only to have the proposal shot down by his co-trustees, B. K. Boman-Behram in particular.
In an interview with Parsiana in November 1973 (“Future Shock”) in response to a query about the BPP claiming the trust had no funds and the public alleging “it has crores of rupees,” Vakil replied: “If you evaluate, say Doongerwadi, on what basis will you do so? On the basis of a burial ground it has no value. But on the basis of a property which can be developed it has tremendous potential.”
While the debate on how best to utilize community property is still to be resolved, another factor emerges: How does one manage the property one has? Time and again one hears at the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meetings about property that has been usurped by unscrupulous trustees or beneficiaries, and of land that has been encroached upon by squatters or neighboring dwellers.
In Mhow, in central India, some trust tenants wanted their accommodation converted into ownership flats. The trustees opposed the move and the Federation voiced their.
The subject once again arose recently when the proposed sale of the Parsi Lying-In Hospital was publicly mooted and subsequently the issue snowballed over the erection of a hoarding at the entrance to the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) Doongerwadi estate. In both cases, the argument put forth by the trustees is that utilization of assets for financial benefit is not inimical to the larger interests of the community.
The Parsi Lying-In Hospital in the Fort area, the first such hospital in the country, has not been functional for several years. This is an understandable predicament allowing for the dearth of Zoroastrian babies being born and the shift of the Parsi population to the suburbs. Private maternity homes in the vicinity of peoples’ residences are more convenient for deliveries than commuting long distances.
In earlier times women remained in confinement for 40 days after delivery. Maternity hospitals were then a much needed requirement. But today when women return home after a few days’ stay, the hospital rooms are underutilized. Aside from housing an office of Parsiana, the hospital is vacant.
So the managing committee and the owners of the property, the BPP considered selling the property to The Cathedral and John Connon School situated across the road from the hospital. Being one of the most reputed educational institutions in Bombay, no one could doubt the bonafides of the trustees in agreeing to a proposal of around 35 crore rupees.
But the question arose not of financial impropriety but rather why sell the building? Why not develop the property for community use? Why not create another home for the aged? Why not use the premises to house the BPP office as it is contesting an eviction notice from its landlord, the the Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Parsee Benevolent Institution trust.
A flurry of e-mails crisscrossed the community grapevine with ideas and suggestions. While people differed on what to do, nearly all were against an outright sale. Community property, they argued, should remain community property.
As for forsaking the princely sum, people inquired why 35 crores was required and what the BPP intended to do with the monies. Build more houses? Doubtful because land is not easily available and the Bombay Parsi population is dwindling by around 500 to 600 a year. The Zoroastrian population in the metropolis has almost halved since 1940.
In regard to the Doongerwadi hoarding imbroglio, the BPP cited a deficit of over a crore of rupees annually as their rationale for permitting a double billboard being erected on the cemetery land. Around 1973, BPP trustee Shiavax R. Vakil mooted the idea of placing hoardings at Doongerwadi only to have the proposal shot down by his co-trustees, B. K. Boman-Behram in particular.
In an interview with Parsiana in November 1973 (“Future Shock”) in response to a query about the BPP claiming the trust had no funds and the public alleging “it has crores of rupees,” Vakil replied: “If you evaluate, say Doongerwadi, on what basis will you do so? On the basis of a burial ground it has no value. But on the basis of a property which can be developed it has tremendous potential.”
While the debate on how best to utilize community property is still to be resolved, another factor emerges: How does one manage the property one has? Time and again one hears at the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meetings about property that has been usurped by unscrupulous trustees or beneficiaries, and of land that has been encroached upon by squatters or neighboring dwellers.
In Mhow, in central India, some trust tenants wanted their accommodation converted into ownership flats. The trustees opposed the move and the Federation voiced their.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive