Editorial Viewpoint
Will it be WABPPIZ now?
With efforts to find a compromise candidate failing, the community is set for a keen tussle to elect a new trustee of the Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP). To fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Noshir Dadrawala, the WAPIZ (World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis) Page of May 6, 2011 in The Free Press Journal announced the candidature of Anahita Desai, the Page’s co-editor and wife of sitting BPP trustee Yazdi Desai.
The bold announcement followed a breakdown in talks between BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta and co-trustees Khojeste Mistree and Desai earlier in the week. That particular trustees’ meeting, which generated much heat and choice language, reportedly went on till 11.30 p.m. The Daily News and Analysis (DNA) of May 7, 2011 quoted Mehta as saying “one family wants to take control of the public trust by making it function like a family-run business.”
Mehta had proposed the candidature of his long-time friend and well-wisher, the respected Tata Sons director Farrokh Kavarana. Kavarana’s mother Silloo was a trustee of the BPP and a Mehta ally. The name of former ICICI Bank chief Hosi Sinor was also put forth. Neither of the two is so far inclined to contest the election though they could probably win.
In his “Parsi Tari Arsi” column in The Bombay Samachar of May 8, 2011, noted solicitor, community strategist and Mehta confidante Berjis Desai claimed “even diehard WAPIZ supporters are upset at this choice… Legal challenges to Anahita’s candidature cannot be ruled out.”
Anticipating an outcry, reputed tax lawyer and former BPP trustee Homi Ranina in his endorsement of Anahita Desai published on the WAPIZ Page remarked, “It should be noted that there is no bar in the High Court sanctioned BPP election scheme against two family members serving as BPP trustees at the same time. I, therefore, emphasize that if we as a community believe in meritocracy and support the process of democracy, then it is only fair that the candidature of Anahita Desai as a BPP trustee should be decided by the will of the people and by the voters exercising their right to choose their own candidate…
“A false impression is being created in the community that a husband and wife team is not good for the Punchayet. Nothing can be farther from the truth! Sir Cowasji Jehangir and Lady Hirabai Cowasji Jehangir, both served together at the same time on the BPP board and their contribution to the community was certainly not diminished. There are many other examples of husband-wife teams serving on the same board and I am not referring to family run trusts, but public trusts. What should be considered is the spirit of service and the altruistic motive of the couple in question; and Anahita and Yazdi Desai, most certainly have both.”
The DNA quotes Vispy Wadia of the Association for Revival of Zoroastrianism (ARZ) countering Ranina’s claims: “The example they are citing of Sir Cowasji and his wife being trustees at the same time is flawed. He was a benevolent donor and philanthropist, which is why they were appointed trustees. These (individuals) are beneficiaries of the trust. There is no comparison.” The Desais live in Rustom Baug, one of the colonies built by the Wadia family, owned by the BPP and managed by a Wadia-BPP committee.
In response to a text message from Parsiana as to his thoughts on Desai’s candidature BPP trustee Jimmy Mistry sent an sms from China, where he was on a visit stating, “I fully support Anahita’s candidature. We need a like-minded person on board who will work with me in the interests of mobeds, agiaries and housing. (I) am confident she will win the elections comfortably.”
Mistry’s siding with WAPIZ means Mehta is effectively isolated on the six-member BPP board. According to Berjis Desai’s column, “after his friend Rustom Tirandaz’s death, Mehta managed to get his widow Armaity elected as a trustee. Today, however, her primary loyalty lies with their family friend Jimmy Mistry.” The columnist alleges that of late WAPIZ has be “openly maligning” Mehta. The only remaining trustee, Arnavaz Mistry is not viewed as being in either camp. In the 2009 election she singly backed the unsuccessful candidature of former BPP trustee and senior Godrej executive Maneck Engineer.
Actually Dadrawala would have been a logical ally for Mehta. He has no love lost for WAPIZ, is an independent minded person and somewhat of a loner — not very different from Mehta. But Mehta, like Mistree, has a knack of quarreling with everyone, even with his onetime allies. He fought with former co-trustees Jameshed Guzder and Minoo Shroff both of whom, like him, belonged to the Committee of Electoral Rights. Mehta was also at daggers drawn with former co-trustees Dinshaw Tamboly and Engineer, both socially conscious and highly regarded individuals.
It was Mehta’s alienation from the various electoral groups that forced him to hitch his wagon to WAPIZ in the October 2008 trusteeship elections. WAPIZ opposed adult franchise and Mehta was inclined to side with them in order to safeguard his chance of becoming chairman of the BPP. WAPIZ had wrested control of the old Anjuman Committee that elected trustees through a complicated and indirect process. The tactic failed as the court ruled in favor of adult franchise. Mehta then contested the elections and won handsomely.
The Mehta-Mistree alliance was one of convenience. Knowing the personalities of both, it was only a matter of time before they fell out.
Mehta is good at troubleshooting but he is not a great long-term strategist or visionary. In comparison WAPIZ have played their cards carefully. First they took control of the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India and now they have made an overt public move to dominate the BPP.
The community has now to decide between opting for a fundamentalist board of trustees controlled by a small, crafty coterie and largely funded by an erratic Ahmedabad based soft drink concentrate magnate or an independent candidate backed by the more pragmatic elements in the community.
The bold announcement followed a breakdown in talks between BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta and co-trustees Khojeste Mistree and Desai earlier in the week. That particular trustees’ meeting, which generated much heat and choice language, reportedly went on till 11.30 p.m. The Daily News and Analysis (DNA) of May 7, 2011 quoted Mehta as saying “one family wants to take control of the public trust by making it function like a family-run business.”
Mehta had proposed the candidature of his long-time friend and well-wisher, the respected Tata Sons director Farrokh Kavarana. Kavarana’s mother Silloo was a trustee of the BPP and a Mehta ally. The name of former ICICI Bank chief Hosi Sinor was also put forth. Neither of the two is so far inclined to contest the election though they could probably win.
In his “Parsi Tari Arsi” column in The Bombay Samachar of May 8, 2011, noted solicitor, community strategist and Mehta confidante Berjis Desai claimed “even diehard WAPIZ supporters are upset at this choice… Legal challenges to Anahita’s candidature cannot be ruled out.”
Anticipating an outcry, reputed tax lawyer and former BPP trustee Homi Ranina in his endorsement of Anahita Desai published on the WAPIZ Page remarked, “It should be noted that there is no bar in the High Court sanctioned BPP election scheme against two family members serving as BPP trustees at the same time. I, therefore, emphasize that if we as a community believe in meritocracy and support the process of democracy, then it is only fair that the candidature of Anahita Desai as a BPP trustee should be decided by the will of the people and by the voters exercising their right to choose their own candidate…
“A false impression is being created in the community that a husband and wife team is not good for the Punchayet. Nothing can be farther from the truth! Sir Cowasji Jehangir and Lady Hirabai Cowasji Jehangir, both served together at the same time on the BPP board and their contribution to the community was certainly not diminished. There are many other examples of husband-wife teams serving on the same board and I am not referring to family run trusts, but public trusts. What should be considered is the spirit of service and the altruistic motive of the couple in question; and Anahita and Yazdi Desai, most certainly have both.”
The DNA quotes Vispy Wadia of the Association for Revival of Zoroastrianism (ARZ) countering Ranina’s claims: “The example they are citing of Sir Cowasji and his wife being trustees at the same time is flawed. He was a benevolent donor and philanthropist, which is why they were appointed trustees. These (individuals) are beneficiaries of the trust. There is no comparison.” The Desais live in Rustom Baug, one of the colonies built by the Wadia family, owned by the BPP and managed by a Wadia-BPP committee.
In response to a text message from Parsiana as to his thoughts on Desai’s candidature BPP trustee Jimmy Mistry sent an sms from China, where he was on a visit stating, “I fully support Anahita’s candidature. We need a like-minded person on board who will work with me in the interests of mobeds, agiaries and housing. (I) am confident she will win the elections comfortably.”
Mistry’s siding with WAPIZ means Mehta is effectively isolated on the six-member BPP board. According to Berjis Desai’s column, “after his friend Rustom Tirandaz’s death, Mehta managed to get his widow Armaity elected as a trustee. Today, however, her primary loyalty lies with their family friend Jimmy Mistry.” The columnist alleges that of late WAPIZ has be “openly maligning” Mehta. The only remaining trustee, Arnavaz Mistry is not viewed as being in either camp. In the 2009 election she singly backed the unsuccessful candidature of former BPP trustee and senior Godrej executive Maneck Engineer.
Actually Dadrawala would have been a logical ally for Mehta. He has no love lost for WAPIZ, is an independent minded person and somewhat of a loner — not very different from Mehta. But Mehta, like Mistree, has a knack of quarreling with everyone, even with his onetime allies. He fought with former co-trustees Jameshed Guzder and Minoo Shroff both of whom, like him, belonged to the Committee of Electoral Rights. Mehta was also at daggers drawn with former co-trustees Dinshaw Tamboly and Engineer, both socially conscious and highly regarded individuals.
It was Mehta’s alienation from the various electoral groups that forced him to hitch his wagon to WAPIZ in the October 2008 trusteeship elections. WAPIZ opposed adult franchise and Mehta was inclined to side with them in order to safeguard his chance of becoming chairman of the BPP. WAPIZ had wrested control of the old Anjuman Committee that elected trustees through a complicated and indirect process. The tactic failed as the court ruled in favor of adult franchise. Mehta then contested the elections and won handsomely.
The Mehta-Mistree alliance was one of convenience. Knowing the personalities of both, it was only a matter of time before they fell out.
Mehta is good at troubleshooting but he is not a great long-term strategist or visionary. In comparison WAPIZ have played their cards carefully. First they took control of the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India and now they have made an overt public move to dominate the BPP.
The community has now to decide between opting for a fundamentalist board of trustees controlled by a small, crafty coterie and largely funded by an erratic Ahmedabad based soft drink concentrate magnate or an independent candidate backed by the more pragmatic elements in the community.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive