“Property proposals…”

Further to "Property proposals and protests” (Parsiana, April 21, 2013), a public notice was issued by the Iranian Zoroastrian Anjuman (IZA) of Bombay in Parsi Times of May 4, 2013 and Jam-e-Jamshed Weekly of May 5, 2013 which not only made interesting reading but also shows the Parsi Press as hostile towards the IZA. Mehrwan Irani deserves credit for creating such a massive sympathy wave, propaganda, hysteria and frenzy amongst palav-dar bawas that even the Parsi Press fell for it.
In the said advertisement the IZA in no uncertain terms accuses the Parsi Press of false propaganda unleashed by Irani and his staunch supporters. Had the IZA sent this as a letter to the editor instead of a paid advertisement, would it have been published? It is anybody’s guess but I strongly feel from my past experience that it would not have been.
On February 15, a national newspaper reported "AI vacates Nariman Point HQ, Moves to Delhi.” The report mentioned that only the three topmost floors had been retained. I sent them an email informing them that this was not true. As expected, my letter was not published. On May 10, the same newspaper carried the report, "No companion free scheme for AI staff.” Once again I sent an email stating that Air India staff never had any companion scheme, but had a certain quota of tickets as entitlement. This letter was not published either.
World Press Freedom Day was celebrated in May. What does this mean? The first rule regarding freedom of the Press seems to be that editors are not accountable, responsible, and liable to readers and subscribers. The second rule is perhaps that they have the exclusive and unabridged right to do what they choose with letters received from readers/subscribers and are not answerable regarding why a letter has been censored or not published.
Coming back to the IZA advertisement certain questions need to be answered:
Is it true that in the past, time and again the IZA had to part with land under government pressure on one pretext or the other?
Is it a fact that there was apprehension that more land would be taken away in the near future by the government which led the IZA to seek legal advice from a retired Supreme Court judge?
Is it true that in accordance with the advice so received, the IZA, under compelling circumstances, decided to sell the land?
Is it true that Irani was in the chair when this decision was taken and he did not object to the sale of land?
Is it true that by public notice in the Press in Ahmedabad, Delhi, Bombay and so on bids were invited for sale of the land to which Irani was a party?
Is it true that the Tata Institute of Social Studies had requested that 400 acres of land be given to them free of cost?
Is it true that the state government asked the IZA to discuss the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation’s (ONGC) request for 2,000 acres of land?
Is it true that Irani did not oppose the sale of land to Viva Homes who were the highest bidder?
If the land is acquired by the state government on some pretext or other, will Irani, his chelas, chamchas (sycophants), and staunch supporters who came out on the streets alleging "Recipe for disaster, zero transparency and brash behavior” as reported by Parsi Times, give an assurance and undertaking to the Parsi community that they will make good the loss suffered by the IZA?
It appears that the matter is now before the Bombay High Court, which will take years if not decades to be resolved. Meanwhile, the State Government has already started the ball rolling to acquire land for ONGC, and approached the authorities concerned not to register any sale document for the Palghar land.
It is very likely that the land will be taken away from the IZA for which full marks go to Irani, his staunch supporters and the Parsi Press.
Till the palav dar Parsis hear the last word on this issue, chaalo Palghar papri noo oomberiyoo khaawaa né taari peevaa (Let’s go to Palghar to eat papri nu oomberiyoo and drink toddy).
BEHRAM AGA
behram_r_aga@yahoo.co.in