Dadrawala clarifies

Unfortunately for the community, 104 deserving Parsi Zoroastrians whose cases were approved (many were even issued allotment letters) by the previous board of trustees have not received accommodation. Naturally, all of them are agitated and angry.

I am compelled to issue this public clarification because the chairman of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) is misleading these applicants by telling them, "All of you are waiting and suffering thanks to Mr Dadrawala.” This is a blatant lie.

I am conscious of the fact that this matter is presently in the Bombay High Court and therefore sub judice. However, this is an exercise in clarifying my position as trustee of the BPP and I am well within my legal rights to state facts which are already before the honorable court of judicature, without my comments.

When the new board of trustees took charge in October 2008 the chairman and some of the new trustees felt that the allotments made by the earlier board were out-of-turn while others were undeserving. I believe that a new board should normally honor the decision taken by the earlier board unless the decision is found to be perverse or is vitiated by fraud. To rule out any element of fraud or perversity, I personally studied all 104 cases and found them deserving. I also found the so-called merit rating scheme to be faulty, a fact which has been accepted by some of my other colleagues.

Many of the 104 applicants had been agitating for their rights at the Charity Commissioner’s office before the new board took over in October 2008. When the new board was in place, the Charity Commissioner directed the new trustees to honor the decision of the previous board and allot the flats. I was the only trustee to file a purshi before the Charity Commissioner stating that I am for allotting flats to all the 104 applicants as I find all of them deserving. Around this time, the board climbed down a bit and agreed to allot flats to 64 out of the 104 applicants.

At this point I withdrew my power of attorney so that justice could be done to all 104 cases and not just to 64. This simply meant that I would personally sign and execute all legal agreements and other documents. Soon thereafter, all the trustees, barring myself, decided to take the matter to the Bombay High Court. As a result, all further allotments have been frozen by the Bombay High Court in a matter where I am not a plaintiff.

People who read this, particularly all the long-suffering applicants, should consider the facts and judge for themselves who is the cause of their suffering and delay in getting the promised flats.

Also, I would like to mention that so far my only difference with the board has been on the issue of allotment of flats to the 104 applicants and Panthaky Baug. On virtually every other issue I work in concert with my colleagues and extend my fullest cooperation.

NOSHIR H. DADRAWALA

Trustee, Bombay Parsi Punchayet

noshir101@hotmail.com