The dwindling and defunct

That the number of defunct anjumans is bound to soar as the Parsi population in India continues its downward spiral was the fear voiced at the half day Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India (FPZAI) West Zone B meet held in Ahmedabad on July 28, 2013. Copies of a scheme to appoint the FPZAI as a custodian of assets belonging to anjumans with a population of 15 or less were distributed to the representatives of 14 West Zone B anjumans present after several complained they had not received copies reportedly couriered to them. Only if an anjuman concurs can the custodian agreement come into effect.
According to the draft agreement circulated for feedback, "in the event of the total number of members (as per the constitution of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman)…being reduced to 15 or less than 15, the FPZAI will take over complete charge of the affairs and properties of the Parsi Anjuman so as to safeguard and manage the same.”
The day-to-day affairs would continue to be managed by the anjuman except in regard to sale of property where certain conditions would apply (see box).

Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trustee and Federation treasurer Yazdi Desai "requested and recommended one joint committee for safeguarding Parsi Zoroastrian property.” The newly convened safeguard committee comprises the FPZAI vice presidents, co-opted members and a legal advisor, according to Desai. The activities of the defunct anjuman committee and the committee for safeguarding community property should be "merged. I suggest the department can be run by the BPP.” Desai and his colleagues in the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) are unhappy with the functioning of Sorab Katpitia of Surat who manages the portfolio and is being viewed as being close to their arch rival, FPZAI and BPP chairman Dinshaw Mehta.
"Everyone talks of the Federation taking action… Everyone in the Federation blames the BPP for not acting on issues… the committees must take the initiative,” asserted Desai. He noted the defunct anjuman committee has "only one person: Katpitia. It is unfair to blame the BPP and Katpitia.” (Katpitia has an assistant, Jimmy Bacha — editors)
West Zone A vice president Mancher Mubarakai recommended that the office bearers of the FPZAI meet "once in two months.” But even meetings that are called are not held, he complained. He was referring to a meeting of the safeguarding committee to be held in Bombay on May 6, 2013 but was cancelled a few days prior by Mehta. "Who calls for the meeting and who cancels it?” he asked rhetorically. He recommended bimonthly meetings on a fixed time and day. The FPZAI meeting scheduled for September 8 in Ahmedabad has also been put off following disputes whether it should be held for one day or two. Also the committee report on amending the bye laws to prevent gross abuse of the proxy clause will not be circulated to the anjumans sufficiently in advance of the meeting. Mehta wants the meet to be held for one day only for the executive council members while the APP and West Zone B vice president and WAPIZ chairman Areez Khambatta insists a two-day meet with all anjumans permitted to attend.
North Zone vice president Tehmton Anklesaria stated "the main (responsibility) of the Federation is towards defunct anjumans… for smaller anjumans with 10 to 12 people. There are 13 anjumans in the north zone. Twelve are below 15 (in number). The Federation is not meant for the BPP,” and other large anjumans. He noted the smaller anjumans faced problems such as encroachment of property. "We’re not doing anything on this subject. Meetings are called. Meetings are cancelled. The custodian rules and regulations are (still) to be framed.”

Commenting on the custodian scheme Pervin Jehangir who is originally from Mhow, the first anjuman to sign the custodianship agreement with the FPZAI and who was representing Illav at the meet observed, "Things will improve if trust is there. Today trustees say we don’t want custodianship…The West Zone anjumans must learn from Mhow’s experience. It is the first one.” Disputes between the residents have resulted in a proposed sale of property being stalled and efforts to revise the Mhow anjuman’s Scheme of Management held up in court. People "are honest, until property is sold,” she alleged (see "A deficit of trust,” Editorial Viewpoint, Parsiana, August, 21, 2013).
Mehta did not wish to discuss the Mhow imbroglio as the anjuman is in the North Zone and "the matter is sub judice…She has taken the trustees of the Mhow anjuman to court. There is no point in washing dirty linen in public…She is trying to prejudice the mind of the Federation.” Anklesaria alleged the sale deed which would have given the anjuman an income of several lakhs of rupees was jeopardized "on account of your (Jehangir’s) high-handedness… The Federation’s image should be built up by all the anjumans,” counselled Anklesaria.
Addressing the gathering later on the subject, Rajkot representative and WAPIZ supporter Khushman Tamboli stated, "No agreement (of custodianship) will have any value” on account of "back stabbing.” He claimed the FPZAI was "undisciplined,” "autocratic” and "broke promises.”
Referring to the controversy over sale of property in Bhusaval (see "A meeting of minds,” Parsiana, May 21, 2013), Mubarakai said though the anjuman was within his zone, "I was not aware of the goings on till yesterday. In Bhusaval, I am an outsider. I was given details by a friendly source.” He urged the FPZAI to "take people into confidence. Don’t be high and mighty.”
His comment on not being informed earlier drew a sharp rebuke from Mehta who reminded Mubarakai that he had briefed him much earlier about the events and requested "will you please go and let me know” the developments? Mubarakai claiming he was informed only yesterday "is not correct. This is not acceptable.”
Regarding custodianship Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayat president Brig (Retd) Jahangir Anklesaria suggested FPZAI "give the trustees a choice…instead of merging with the Federation if the anjuman chooses to merge with a neighboring anjuman, it should be given a free hand to do so.” For example if Bharuch is more comfortable dealing with Baroda they should be permitted to sign up with them. "The Federation has 70 anjumans to look after.” Neighboring anjumans would be in a better position to assist one another.

Marzban Wadia (left) and Pervin Jehangir;

Jimmy Bacha (left) and Sorab Katpitia

Lt Col (Retd) A. M. Chinoy of Vadodara believed the custodianship scheme had "not been explained properly…Only then can we consider the proposal.”
Pervez Mehta of Bardoli who is also the joint honorary secretary of the FPZAI endorsed the sentiment suggesting "a joint meeting…people should first understand” before committing.
Amplifying on the custodian scheme, Dinshaw Mehta explained that "the community is dying out in each and every” place. Even in the Parsi colonies in Bombay. "When an anjuman’s population dies out, the land has to be protected before it falls into the hands of encroachers.” In anticipation of such an event the FPZAI had devised the custodianship scheme. The property did not belong to any person, "it belongs to the community” and should be utilized "for the larger interest of the community.” The sentiment should be "Aapru chhè. Aapré joisu (It is ours. We will look after it).” He said he expected other anjumans to follow in the steps of Mhow and Neemuch and sign the custodian treaty. Neemuch, however, at the January 26, 2013 FPZAI meet in Bombay stated they "regretted” signing the agreement.
During discussion on Bhusaval, Anahita Desai, the WAPIZ chief executive officer who represented Khergam at the zonal meet alleged that when Doongerwadi property there was to be sold, the BPP and not the FPZAI signed the papers. Mehta replied, "I am not aware. The Federation secretary and the president sign.” She also alleged the money went into the BPP coffers and not the FPZAI. A sum of Rs 75,00,000 had been given as a deposit against a total sale price of four to five crore rupees. At this point talk between Katpitia and others focused on the minutia of the proposed sale (Parsiana had fixed an appointment to meet Katpitia in Bombay but due to heavy rains his train from Surat arrived almost two hours after the appointed time). There was apparently some confusion in the minds of the Bhusaval trustees explained Mehta who "came and apologized to Katpitia… The matter is now closed. Let us go forward for God’s sake.”
Yazdi Desai however had no intention of obliging Mehta. He stated that Katpitia had claimed "there were no Parsis in Bhusaval,” but there were 15. He referred to a letter Katpitia’s assistant Jimmy Bacha had written to Rajat Patel regarding the sale of property which Desai alleged Bacha claimed was "a forgery. This looks fishy…If somebody uses your letterhead, forges your signature, the first thing you would do is go to the police and file an FIR (first information report). Not only the Bhusaval (representatives) but the Federation should also file” a complaint.
Bacha informed Parsiana over the phone from his Navsari residence that he never claimed the letter was forged. He had only written to the go-between to bring the entire amount due, before signing of the sale agreement. "Mè su khottu kidhu (What did I do wrong)?” he queried.
Desai alleged "some people in the Federation are involved. My only request was to find out what happened…the property was sold to (the same) person dealing with the sale of property in Dharwad.”
Khambatta called for the FPZAI "to form a vigilance committee for the defunct anjumans.”
Mehta clarified that the 16 or so "residents of Bhusaval” were actually "residents of Bombay.” In many small and defunct anjumans many of the erstwhile residents gravitate to neighboring, larger cities with Bombay attracting the largest number from the West Zone B.
Khambatta then turned to the subject of matrimonial meets in West Zone B and lamented, "Unfortunately the BPP took no interest.”
Mehta clarified that BPP trustee Arnavaz Mistry "is in charge of the portfolio…I am not in the know…You should have invited her to the (zonal) meet.”
Brig Anklesaria: "Would it be possible to hold a meet in Bombay for the benefit of all Zoroastrians?”
Dinshaw Mehta: "Every month meets are held (by the BPP). The Zoroastrian Youth for Next Generation (ZYNG) holds meets every other month. If the Federation wants to join, talk to her (Arnavaz). It’s her baby. I can’t decide.”
Brig Anklesaria: "Persuade her to hold an all-India meet.”
Dastur Khurshed Dastoor, high priest of Udvada said "people from Gujarat are looked down upon” by Bombay Parsis at the meets. Bombayites "should not insult the girls or no one will come.” He said that Parsi women are better educated and occupied higher positions. Men asked silly questions such as whether the women "will look after” them? "There should be some standard. Some check. This is really disgusting.”
Yezdi Panthaki of Saronda suggested that some training be imparted to the youth so "they come prepared for the meeting (matrimonial meeting).”
Khambatta: "No need to brief boys and girls. They have a sixth sense.”
Regarding housing, Brig Anklesaria noted that APP housing allocated to a tenant "had not been used for decades. The tenant is paying rent of a pittance of Rs 25.” When it was pointed out that the flat was lying unused, the tenant "agreed to pay five percent more as per the law.”
To counter the shortage of accommodation in large cities, and the lack of youth residing in smaller anjumans Mubarakai suggested that if the parents were rehabilitated in a place where housing was available, the children would follow. He mentioned that former Iranian Zoroastrian Anjuman president Mehrwan Irani had made that observation.
Dinshaw Mehta however told him, "There is no need to send anyone to Navsari or Surat. The main problem is the dwindling population… We have ample housing (in Bombay) to comply with all demands. He noted the BPP waiting list for housing had reduced from 3,300 to 700 today. The question is "how do we get them to marry young.” He noted that many marry at 35 and the percentage of people in the reproductive age "was very small.”
Baman Cama of Vadodara chipped in, "Population is of the essence. All other problems can be tackled.”
Dinshaw Mehta suggested all the delegates attend the 10th World Zoroastrian Congress in December where the topic of population would be discussed.
Those present were Brig Jahangir Anklesaria from Ahmedabad; Homi Pithawalla and Pervez Mehta from Bardoli; Marzban Baria from Bilimora; Marzban Wadia from Davier; Pervin Jehangir from Illav; Anahita Desai from Khergam; Hosi Bajina, Dr Hoshang Mogal and Rohinton Mogal from Mahuva; Hoshang Wania and Farroakh Govadia from Nargol; Khushman Tamboli from Rajkot; Dinshaw Patel, Ervad Yezdi Panthaki and Sarosh Poonawala from Saronda; Dastur Khurshed Dastoor and Ervad Pirojsha Sidhwa from Udvada; Baman Cama, C. N. Bhesania and Lt Col A. M. Chinoy from Vadodara; Sam Chothia from Valsad; Keki Lakdawala from Vesu; Persi Buhariwala and Sarosh Buhariwala from Vyara Songadh. The Federation office bearers present were: president Dinshaw Mehta, vice presidents (Zone A) Mancher Mubarakai, (Zone B) Areez Khambatta, (North Zone) Tehmton Anklesaria and treasurer Yazdi Desai. The Press was represented by Parsiana. Concluded