Editorial Viewpoint
What’s in a name?
The trustees of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) are spoiling for a fight. Barely have they got over being billed Rs 24,00,000 for legal expenses following their ill conceived resolution banning two allegedly renegade priests from performing religious ceremonies on their trust property, they have now opened a new battlefront.
On March 18, 2010 five trustees passed a resolution barring Parsi women married to non-Parsis who change their names after marriage the right to have their bodies consigned to the dakhmas at Doongerwadi. Their motive in initiating this obtuse declaration was to bolster the case of the Valsad Parsi Anjuman (VPA) in the Ahmedabad High Court.
Since bigotry is not the sole monopoly of the BPP trustees, some of their counterparts in Valsad decided to deny entry in their fire temples to Parsi women married to non-Parsis. The woman in question Goolrookh Mahipal Gupta (née Contractor) decided to confront the trustees’ arbitrary action by filing a writ petition in the Ahmedabad Court. Her sister Shiraz Patodia, being a lawyer, gave Gupta the confidence to go ahead. Her legal representatives agreed to fight the matter without charging fees. The sisters have only to raise money for out-of-pocket expenses.
The VPA’s legal expenses are believed to be financed by WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) chairman Areez Khambatta. So money is no consideration for them. So also for the BPP trustees. Since lawyers’ fees are paid by the trust, the trustees are apparently unconcerned about the ever mounting legal bills.
The new BPP resolution does not qualify whether the change of the first name, surname or both disqualifies the women. Parsiana wrote a letter dated April 5, 2010 to the BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta asking for a clarification and a copy of the resolution. Till April 14, no reply had been received. Gupta had changed her first name to Neha around four months prior to her marriage held on February 1, 1991.
We are informed that trustees Jimmy Mistry and Noshir Dadrawala were not present when the resolution was passed. Dadrawala reportedly left the meeting at 9 p.m. as he had to go out of town the next day. The resolution was passed after his departure. Mehta, Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai would have favored the resolution, the latter two being WAPIZ founder members. Trustees Arnavaz Mistry, whose daughter is married to a non-Parsi, and Armaity Tirandaz must have acquiesced, not wanting to be labelled reformists or being subject to the same treatment that Dadrawala receives for opposing Mehta and Mistree.
How much interest Desai takes in the workings of the BPP is unknown nor how much influence he wields. He reportedly attends the meetings late and at public functions his wife’s presence is noted more than his. Jimmy Mistry is busy with his property development projects and is reportedly ofttimes absent.
There is also talk of the BPP undoing many of the past resolutions such as the one following the tragic death of young Roxan Shah about 20 years ago. At that time the then trustees under the chairmanship of Dr Aspi Golwalla resolved that a Parsi woman married to a non-Parsi could on her death have her body consigned to the Towers of Silence if her family submitted an affidavit stating she was married under the Special Marriage Act and continued to profess the Zoroastrian religion.
Noted solicitor Rusi Sethna had stated at a BPP trusteeship election meet at the Cricket Club of India (CCI) premises on September 23, 2008 that people did not like Mehta because he was not knighted or high born. He went on to state that Mehta would prove to be the best chairman the BPP ever had. While the jury may be out on his achievements, he is certainly the most combative chairman.
In early 2009 Mehta challenged the allotment of flats to 104 applicants made by the previous board to which he also was a party. He alleged he went along under pressure and had voiced his dissent at the time. His present co-trustees — with the exception of Dadrawala — endorsed his appeal. As a result of which the 104 allottees are still without the promised homes and the BPP is saddled with hefty legal costs.
On June 9, 2009 came the resolution barring the two priests Ervads Framroze Mirza and Khushroo Madon from praying at Doongerwadi, the Godavra Agiary and the S. F. Jokhi Agiary at Godrej Baug. The trustees felt no one would have the gumption to challenge their action in court. But when a group of lawyers who felt strongly about the injustice and rampant abuse of power by the BPP fought the case with petitioners of note, the BPP panicked. They appointed one lawyer, then another and finally opted for a leading counsel to represent them.
While Mirza strengthened the BPP case by submitting an affidavit in court saying he was not consulted on the case and that he accepted the dictates of the high priests who supported the ban, Madon stayed the course. He has cast himself in the mold of the late Dastur (Dr) Framroze Bode (Bode’s critics publicly alleged he was not a dastur, doctor or ervad but “Mr Bode”). Bode fought steadfastly for what he believed in, however unpopular his deeds and utterances may have been at the time (around 50 years ago). No resolutions however were passed barring him from performing religious ceremonies. Shows how much we have “progressed” since then!
Madon narrowly escaped being assaulted along with the Russian Zoroastrian Mikhail Chistyakov when Mehta and around 40 others from Bombay and Surat barged into Meher Master Moos’ Sanjan College this February. Madon had left a day earlier for Bombay.
We are informed Mehta and his vigilantes intend to protest/disrupt navjotes of children born to a Parsi Zoroastrian mother and non-Parsi Christian father at Bandra on April 16, 2010. The family has sought a police presence at the function. The mother Roshni D’Souza (née Maloo) is at a loss to understand how any religion could bar children from its portals.
Mehta armed with a letter condemning the navjote from four high priests, Dastur (Dr) Kaikhusroo JamaspAsa, Dastur (Dr) Firoze Kotwal, Dastur (Dr) Peshotan Mirza and Dastur Khurshed Dastoor, is bent on raising a ruckus at the initiation function.
If the chairman of the BPP leading a band of self appointed defenders of the faith is not bad enough, we also have a resolution antagonizing the women of our community who are exercising their democratic right to select a spouse of their choice. We can sympathize with the trustees’ frustration. Despite winning an overwhelming mandate they are unable to deliver on any of their electoral promises. Lacking any vision or master plan, wracked by dissent from both within and without, confronted by powerful lobbies and alienated from the intellectual elite in the community, they have fallen victim to their own hubris.
As two past trustees of the BPP commented to Parsiana, “ai loko sudhertaa nathi (these people are not improving).” Instead they are going from bad to worse.
On March 18, 2010 five trustees passed a resolution barring Parsi women married to non-Parsis who change their names after marriage the right to have their bodies consigned to the dakhmas at Doongerwadi. Their motive in initiating this obtuse declaration was to bolster the case of the Valsad Parsi Anjuman (VPA) in the Ahmedabad High Court.
Since bigotry is not the sole monopoly of the BPP trustees, some of their counterparts in Valsad decided to deny entry in their fire temples to Parsi women married to non-Parsis. The woman in question Goolrookh Mahipal Gupta (née Contractor) decided to confront the trustees’ arbitrary action by filing a writ petition in the Ahmedabad Court. Her sister Shiraz Patodia, being a lawyer, gave Gupta the confidence to go ahead. Her legal representatives agreed to fight the matter without charging fees. The sisters have only to raise money for out-of-pocket expenses.
The VPA’s legal expenses are believed to be financed by WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) chairman Areez Khambatta. So money is no consideration for them. So also for the BPP trustees. Since lawyers’ fees are paid by the trust, the trustees are apparently unconcerned about the ever mounting legal bills.
The new BPP resolution does not qualify whether the change of the first name, surname or both disqualifies the women. Parsiana wrote a letter dated April 5, 2010 to the BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta asking for a clarification and a copy of the resolution. Till April 14, no reply had been received. Gupta had changed her first name to Neha around four months prior to her marriage held on February 1, 1991.
We are informed that trustees Jimmy Mistry and Noshir Dadrawala were not present when the resolution was passed. Dadrawala reportedly left the meeting at 9 p.m. as he had to go out of town the next day. The resolution was passed after his departure. Mehta, Khojeste Mistree and Yazdi Desai would have favored the resolution, the latter two being WAPIZ founder members. Trustees Arnavaz Mistry, whose daughter is married to a non-Parsi, and Armaity Tirandaz must have acquiesced, not wanting to be labelled reformists or being subject to the same treatment that Dadrawala receives for opposing Mehta and Mistree.
How much interest Desai takes in the workings of the BPP is unknown nor how much influence he wields. He reportedly attends the meetings late and at public functions his wife’s presence is noted more than his. Jimmy Mistry is busy with his property development projects and is reportedly ofttimes absent.
There is also talk of the BPP undoing many of the past resolutions such as the one following the tragic death of young Roxan Shah about 20 years ago. At that time the then trustees under the chairmanship of Dr Aspi Golwalla resolved that a Parsi woman married to a non-Parsi could on her death have her body consigned to the Towers of Silence if her family submitted an affidavit stating she was married under the Special Marriage Act and continued to profess the Zoroastrian religion.
Noted solicitor Rusi Sethna had stated at a BPP trusteeship election meet at the Cricket Club of India (CCI) premises on September 23, 2008 that people did not like Mehta because he was not knighted or high born. He went on to state that Mehta would prove to be the best chairman the BPP ever had. While the jury may be out on his achievements, he is certainly the most combative chairman.
In early 2009 Mehta challenged the allotment of flats to 104 applicants made by the previous board to which he also was a party. He alleged he went along under pressure and had voiced his dissent at the time. His present co-trustees — with the exception of Dadrawala — endorsed his appeal. As a result of which the 104 allottees are still without the promised homes and the BPP is saddled with hefty legal costs.
On June 9, 2009 came the resolution barring the two priests Ervads Framroze Mirza and Khushroo Madon from praying at Doongerwadi, the Godavra Agiary and the S. F. Jokhi Agiary at Godrej Baug. The trustees felt no one would have the gumption to challenge their action in court. But when a group of lawyers who felt strongly about the injustice and rampant abuse of power by the BPP fought the case with petitioners of note, the BPP panicked. They appointed one lawyer, then another and finally opted for a leading counsel to represent them.
While Mirza strengthened the BPP case by submitting an affidavit in court saying he was not consulted on the case and that he accepted the dictates of the high priests who supported the ban, Madon stayed the course. He has cast himself in the mold of the late Dastur (Dr) Framroze Bode (Bode’s critics publicly alleged he was not a dastur, doctor or ervad but “Mr Bode”). Bode fought steadfastly for what he believed in, however unpopular his deeds and utterances may have been at the time (around 50 years ago). No resolutions however were passed barring him from performing religious ceremonies. Shows how much we have “progressed” since then!
Madon narrowly escaped being assaulted along with the Russian Zoroastrian Mikhail Chistyakov when Mehta and around 40 others from Bombay and Surat barged into Meher Master Moos’ Sanjan College this February. Madon had left a day earlier for Bombay.
We are informed Mehta and his vigilantes intend to protest/disrupt navjotes of children born to a Parsi Zoroastrian mother and non-Parsi Christian father at Bandra on April 16, 2010. The family has sought a police presence at the function. The mother Roshni D’Souza (née Maloo) is at a loss to understand how any religion could bar children from its portals.
Mehta armed with a letter condemning the navjote from four high priests, Dastur (Dr) Kaikhusroo JamaspAsa, Dastur (Dr) Firoze Kotwal, Dastur (Dr) Peshotan Mirza and Dastur Khurshed Dastoor, is bent on raising a ruckus at the initiation function.
If the chairman of the BPP leading a band of self appointed defenders of the faith is not bad enough, we also have a resolution antagonizing the women of our community who are exercising their democratic right to select a spouse of their choice. We can sympathize with the trustees’ frustration. Despite winning an overwhelming mandate they are unable to deliver on any of their electoral promises. Lacking any vision or master plan, wracked by dissent from both within and without, confronted by powerful lobbies and alienated from the intellectual elite in the community, they have fallen victim to their own hubris.
As two past trustees of the BPP commented to Parsiana, “ai loko sudhertaa nathi (these people are not improving).” Instead they are going from bad to worse.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive