Editorial Viewpoint
Shunning the voters
For the first time since the current Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trustees assumed office, they appear to be on the defensive. Normally full of bluster and ready to avail of any and every opportunity to tom-tom their achievements, the seven appear to have given the annual anjuman meet a go by.
Last October six of them held a disastrous meeting at the Dadar Parsi Gymkhana where their failure to seek the requisite permission resulted in the microphone being used only for around 45 minutes. There amidst the usual cries of “shame, shame” and “all of Andheri is with you” BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta and his second-in-command Khojeste Mistree launched a broadside against their electoral opponents, the Parsi Press, the “renegade” priests and their supporters, and others.
So one looked forward to what the seven would have to say this time around. BPP trustee Noshir Dadrawala who is at cross purposes with his co-trustees or vice-versa, absented himself at that last gathering. Since then he has fought and won in the Assistant Charity Commissioner’s (ACC) office for his right to receive the minutes and other relevant papers pertaining to the trust. But the remaining six trustees are stonewalling giving him the sought documents. At least one meeting of the trustees reportedly ended with the item on the agenda about handing over the minutes not being discussed. The six are now preparing to waste more trust funds by appealing the ACC’s decision in the Bombay High Court.
Apart from writing about his humiliation, Dadrawala has so far refrained from taking the issue directly to the electorate. As a result his co-trustees in turn remain in their comfort zone, cutting themselves off from any official public meetings at which they may be questioned. And there is no dearth of questions.
Why are the six withholding papers from their co-trustee? Have they indulged in any wrong doing that they do not want the community to know? What secrets lie buried in those minutes and documents that they are so desperate to keep even from an elected co-trustee’s eyes?
How many millions of rupees has the trust spent fighting allotments for the 104 families that were granted flats by the earlier board of which Mehta was a member? How many more millions were spent defending the inane resolution barring two priests from performing religious ceremonies at Doongerwadi and two agiaries controlled by the trust? How much was spent in litigation to deny Dadrawala access to the minutes and how much more will be spent in this senseless, ego-fuelled law suit? Still looming are the legal charges for the case pertaining to the alleged assault on Meher Master-Moos in Sanjan.
And while the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) waxes eloquent on the need to respect our high priests, their chairman publicly denigrates a dastur of Udvada, one of the community’s most orthodox bastions. While our high priests are quick to write letters of support favoring the actions of the BPP and WAPIZ they curiously are silent when one of their own is ostracized.
If a public meeting were held the WAPIZ trustees on the BPP board — Mistree and Yazdi Desai — will also have to explain why they opposed heritage status for Udvada thereby endangering the most sacred pilgrimage site of the Parsis while at the same time opting for heritage status for the Bombay fire temples.
The trustees could also be questioned on the progress they have made on the housing front. According to the consent terms filed in the Bombay High Court in October 2009 the BPP agreed to build 300 to 400 flats for the poor within two years. The proposal probably has not gone past the planning stage though over a year has passed. The 104 allotments have been finalized after much name-calling, mud-slinging and shouting. The retired Bombay High Court judge Hosbet Suresh who had the misfortune to deliberate over the issue reportedly fell ill on more than one occasion.
And legal issues have been raised regarding the sale of ownership flats in the new building being constructed at Godrej Baug. Under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) whenever ownership flats are constructed and sold, the land on which the structure stands has to be conveyed to the new owners. Would this conveyance be permitted on lands adjacent to Doongerwadi in the heart of Godrej Baug? In light of the recent amendments to the Income Tax Act 1961 would the sale be tantamount to the trust indulging in business activities thereby endangering the trust’s tax exempt status?
The 10th World Zoroastrian Congress is to be held in December 2013 in Bombay (the BPP trustees hijacked the hosting of the congress from Singapore which bid for and won the nomination). A year has passed since then and the trustees have been so preoccupied in litigation of their own making that no progress has been made on the global meet, at least none that they have chosen to make public. Why bid for a congress when you have no time to prepare for it? We can only hope the gathering does not end up like the Commonwealth Games in Delhi this October with last minute slipshod preparations. The Congress will be a good time to showcase the BPP’s achievements, assuming there are any.
The seven trustees have less than five years of their present term left in office. There is talk of all of them resigning a few months earlier when Mehta’s term expires in June 2015 to avoid multiple elections and save on costs. Under the present scheme no trustee can serve more than 21 years and Mehta’s 21 years will expire then. So except for Mehta and Dadrawala who is unlikely to seek reelection, the remaining five will have to face an angry electorate should they decide to seek a second term.
With Desai arriving for most meetings towards the end (though reportedly between Mistree and Desai the two ensure one or the other is present for the entire BPP’s weekly trustees’ meetings), BPP trustee Jimmy Mistry being involved with his business, Dadrawala being cold-shouldered and sidelined and Arnavaz Mistry and Armaity Tirandaz going along with the majority, decision making in the BPP is primarily in the hands of Mehta and Mistree.
In The BPP Review for the months of October and November 2010 the trustees mention their plans for the future. Mehta talks about “a clean and green baug campaign,” Arnavaz Mistry of her dreams and visions for the community, Jimmy Mistry about constructing a 1,000 flats, improving the lot of mobeds, preparing a blueprint for Doongerwadi and restoring the Godavra agiary, Khojeste Mistree about his work at Doongerwadi, Desai about making the BPP “more vibrant, friendly, transparent, rich and above all more ‘Parsi’” and Tirandaz about her work for children with special needs.
In Bihar, Nitish Kumar and his allies were reelected because they were perceived as having worked for the development of that impoverished state. The remaining five trustees must think about making their individual marks. Will they be viewed as yes people and rubber stamps or people who delivered on their promises? Let them face the community at least once a year and present a report of their doings or risk facing ignominy in 2015.
Last October six of them held a disastrous meeting at the Dadar Parsi Gymkhana where their failure to seek the requisite permission resulted in the microphone being used only for around 45 minutes. There amidst the usual cries of “shame, shame” and “all of Andheri is with you” BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta and his second-in-command Khojeste Mistree launched a broadside against their electoral opponents, the Parsi Press, the “renegade” priests and their supporters, and others.
So one looked forward to what the seven would have to say this time around. BPP trustee Noshir Dadrawala who is at cross purposes with his co-trustees or vice-versa, absented himself at that last gathering. Since then he has fought and won in the Assistant Charity Commissioner’s (ACC) office for his right to receive the minutes and other relevant papers pertaining to the trust. But the remaining six trustees are stonewalling giving him the sought documents. At least one meeting of the trustees reportedly ended with the item on the agenda about handing over the minutes not being discussed. The six are now preparing to waste more trust funds by appealing the ACC’s decision in the Bombay High Court.
Apart from writing about his humiliation, Dadrawala has so far refrained from taking the issue directly to the electorate. As a result his co-trustees in turn remain in their comfort zone, cutting themselves off from any official public meetings at which they may be questioned. And there is no dearth of questions.
Why are the six withholding papers from their co-trustee? Have they indulged in any wrong doing that they do not want the community to know? What secrets lie buried in those minutes and documents that they are so desperate to keep even from an elected co-trustee’s eyes?
How many millions of rupees has the trust spent fighting allotments for the 104 families that were granted flats by the earlier board of which Mehta was a member? How many more millions were spent defending the inane resolution barring two priests from performing religious ceremonies at Doongerwadi and two agiaries controlled by the trust? How much was spent in litigation to deny Dadrawala access to the minutes and how much more will be spent in this senseless, ego-fuelled law suit? Still looming are the legal charges for the case pertaining to the alleged assault on Meher Master-Moos in Sanjan.
And while the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) waxes eloquent on the need to respect our high priests, their chairman publicly denigrates a dastur of Udvada, one of the community’s most orthodox bastions. While our high priests are quick to write letters of support favoring the actions of the BPP and WAPIZ they curiously are silent when one of their own is ostracized.
If a public meeting were held the WAPIZ trustees on the BPP board — Mistree and Yazdi Desai — will also have to explain why they opposed heritage status for Udvada thereby endangering the most sacred pilgrimage site of the Parsis while at the same time opting for heritage status for the Bombay fire temples.
The trustees could also be questioned on the progress they have made on the housing front. According to the consent terms filed in the Bombay High Court in October 2009 the BPP agreed to build 300 to 400 flats for the poor within two years. The proposal probably has not gone past the planning stage though over a year has passed. The 104 allotments have been finalized after much name-calling, mud-slinging and shouting. The retired Bombay High Court judge Hosbet Suresh who had the misfortune to deliberate over the issue reportedly fell ill on more than one occasion.
And legal issues have been raised regarding the sale of ownership flats in the new building being constructed at Godrej Baug. Under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) whenever ownership flats are constructed and sold, the land on which the structure stands has to be conveyed to the new owners. Would this conveyance be permitted on lands adjacent to Doongerwadi in the heart of Godrej Baug? In light of the recent amendments to the Income Tax Act 1961 would the sale be tantamount to the trust indulging in business activities thereby endangering the trust’s tax exempt status?
The 10th World Zoroastrian Congress is to be held in December 2013 in Bombay (the BPP trustees hijacked the hosting of the congress from Singapore which bid for and won the nomination). A year has passed since then and the trustees have been so preoccupied in litigation of their own making that no progress has been made on the global meet, at least none that they have chosen to make public. Why bid for a congress when you have no time to prepare for it? We can only hope the gathering does not end up like the Commonwealth Games in Delhi this October with last minute slipshod preparations. The Congress will be a good time to showcase the BPP’s achievements, assuming there are any.
The seven trustees have less than five years of their present term left in office. There is talk of all of them resigning a few months earlier when Mehta’s term expires in June 2015 to avoid multiple elections and save on costs. Under the present scheme no trustee can serve more than 21 years and Mehta’s 21 years will expire then. So except for Mehta and Dadrawala who is unlikely to seek reelection, the remaining five will have to face an angry electorate should they decide to seek a second term.
With Desai arriving for most meetings towards the end (though reportedly between Mistree and Desai the two ensure one or the other is present for the entire BPP’s weekly trustees’ meetings), BPP trustee Jimmy Mistry being involved with his business, Dadrawala being cold-shouldered and sidelined and Arnavaz Mistry and Armaity Tirandaz going along with the majority, decision making in the BPP is primarily in the hands of Mehta and Mistree.
In The BPP Review for the months of October and November 2010 the trustees mention their plans for the future. Mehta talks about “a clean and green baug campaign,” Arnavaz Mistry of her dreams and visions for the community, Jimmy Mistry about constructing a 1,000 flats, improving the lot of mobeds, preparing a blueprint for Doongerwadi and restoring the Godavra agiary, Khojeste Mistree about his work at Doongerwadi, Desai about making the BPP “more vibrant, friendly, transparent, rich and above all more ‘Parsi’” and Tirandaz about her work for children with special needs.
In Bihar, Nitish Kumar and his allies were reelected because they were perceived as having worked for the development of that impoverished state. The remaining five trustees must think about making their individual marks. Will they be viewed as yes people and rubber stamps or people who delivered on their promises? Let them face the community at least once a year and present a report of their doings or risk facing ignominy in 2015.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive