The resolution of painful conflicts

The ordeal the trustees and beneficiaries of the Iranian Zoroastrian Anjuman (IZA) of Bombay are undergoing is symptomatic of what is happening across the community. As our numbers continue to deplete and our assets outnumber our needs, finding the right balance between utilization, disposal and development are coming to the fore.
The controversy evolves around the proposed sale of 963 acres in Palghar belonging to the IZA. In past times, the land could have been used for community housing, a school, college, library, a hospital and even an industrial zone or commercial hub if permitted. Today barely a handful of families would move to this northern Maharashtra town. A few more may purchase a flat as a holiday home to be used once or twice a year. There would not be enough Parsi students in the area to fill a classroom, leave aside a school or college.
Guarding the land is a hazardous and expensive proposition. The alternative is to have it usurped by squatters and encroachments as has happened to the vast Doongerwadi lands in Surat and Poona and the private road to the Navsari Doongerwadi.
At one time decisions would have been reached within the four walls of an anjuman or punchayet boardroom after which a public statement announcing the completion of the transaction may or may not have been made. The IZA deal would have fitted this mold except for the divisions between the trustees that first publicly manifested at the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meet in Bombay this January.
After the conflict was reported in the Parsi Press, the story appeared on the front page of The Times of India (March 3, 2013). Other papers pursued the developments. Members of the IZA picketed a special general committee meeting that saw IZA president Mehrwan Irani ousted. For a trust that once refused to talk to the Press even about the holding or results of their elections and issued fiats barring any of the trustees from doing so, the IZA was now in the thick of media coverage.
We can blame the IZA leadership for their former ill advised, closed shop policy. Had they taken their members and other associations into confidence, followed a more inclusive policy, there would have been a greater likelihood of an acceptable solution being reached. The Wadia Committee of Management consisting of representatives of the Wadia family and the Bombay Parsi Punchayet trustees held a meet with the tenants of Nowroz Baug to arrive at a consensus regarding redevelopment.
The residents of the oldest Wadia colony have to make a difficult choice: whether to continue with the status quo or opt for an ambitious reconstruction program that while changing the complexion of the 105-year-old Baug also introduces an element of risk: would there be enough takers for the ownership flats that would be sold to recover the high and escalating costs? As Wadia family scion Nusli Wadia rightly said, "We leave it to your good judgment.”
There are no right and wrong answers to the questions. And there are more questions than answers. Every solution is fraught with risks. But at the same time not doing anything can also be disastrous. The IZA would have to spend eight crore rupees to build a protective wall around their property. Plus they would have to hire a posse of security guards. All of this would be worthwhile if the land was eventually put to good use. The danger is that the dispute may land up in the courts and drag on interminably. How will the land be safeguarded in the interim?
We have seen in the case of the Tithal Sanatorium grounds in Gujarat near Valsad that this vast tract of prime, sea facing land has been in dispute over the last 30 years. Assuming the land is finally returned to the trust to what purpose will it be put? And how will it be safeguarded till then? Right now the party that claims the right to purchase the property has a vested interest in protecting the asset but what happens if they are no longer concerned?
The community has any number of properties tied up in dispute. The development of the Parsi Lying-In Hospital is another case in point. The Hospital has been closed over the last 15 years or more. The court battle may continue for as long if not longer. Any decision in one party’s favor is bound to be challenged by the other.
But has it always been like this? As Nusli told the Nowroz Baug gathering in March, when his great-grandmother wanted to build colonies, she hired "the best architects, the best construction and just went ahead and built.” She did not have lengthy debates on the issue. "She went and did what she did, that is build colonies.” Sir Dorab Tata handed over 42 acres in Panchgani for the Bel Air Sanatorium. The flooring of some of the 50 odd structures put up there have Italian tiles. This was a hospital meant for the poor! But the benefactors did not discriminate between the haves and have nots.
The community appears to be floundering in uncharted waters. A more assertive, aware citizenery will want to participate in the decision making process. Power has to be shared. This development is not unique to the Parsis and Iranis. It is an integral part of today’s society with its greater complexities. But at the same time technology, new management strategies, think tanks have evolved to cope with the unprecedented realities. Urban development, mass transportation, medical services, airports, federations of countries are all possible because of human and technological innovations.
What made the community great in the past was its ability to overcome obstacles, find solutions. We need to reassess our strategies and approaches if we are to optimize our substantial material assets for ourselves and others.