“Unnecessary hindrances”
Personal enmity surfaces in the discourse between the Bombay Parsi Punchayet chairman Dinshaw Mehta and members of the Parsi Lying-In Hospital Managing Committee
Mehta has been at cross-purposes with PLIH MC members Yezdi Bhagwagar and Kersi Randeria. Mehta fell out with Bhagwagar several years ago over the lease of the Shahnazeen building in Khareghat Colony developed by noted architect Noshir Talati. Randeria had supported the initial unsuccessful candidature of Maneck Engineer against Mehta in 1994 and subsequently a panel of candidates for the 2008 BPP trusteeship elections that opposed Mehta’s re-election bid. Mehta won and subsequently he and Randeria joined forces to support the 2011election of Muncherji Cama against Anahita Desai, the World Alliance of Parsi Irani Zarthoshtis (WAPIZ) chief executive officer and wife of sitting BPP trustee Yazdi Desai. The deep fissures remain between Mehta and Bhagwagar/Randeria.
Photo: Jasmine D. Driver
Parsiana publishes emails exchanged between Mehta, Randeria, Bhagwagar and BPP senior executive welfare Cawas Panthaki regarding the PLIH scheme. The correspondence also refers to subsequent proposals for development of the PLIH received from Breach Candy Hospital (BCH) and neurosurgeon Dr Keki Turel.
With the two offers procured by Mehta failing to match the proposals put forth by Krimson Health Care, "finalization of the draft consent terms is being delayed unnecessarily,” according to an elaborate explanation by the PLIH MC sent to the BPP trustees.
According to the PLIH MC analysis, the BCH proposal would generate Rs 1.24 crores annually while Krimson’s offer works out to Rs 6.06 crores after allowing for the amounts to be paid to the collector and property tax. These calculations are on the assumption of their reaching an annual turnover of Rs 155 crores. Property taxes would have been deducted from the PLIH rentals by BCH whilst Krimson was willing to bear the costs of property tax, service tax as also the lease renewal.
Another important consideration was Krimson’s commitment to give free treatment to 10% of inpatients and outpatients being members of the Parsi Irani Zoroastrian community whilst BCH reportedly did not make such an offer. As reiterated by the MC, "This facility of free treatment is not negotiable and ought to find a place in any such commercial agreement. Considering a bare minimum cost of Rs 75,000 per procedure/surgery (which would include the hospitalization and the doctor’s fees) and considering on an average 600 procedures/surgeries per annum, the benefit of this account works out to Rs 4.5 crores to Rs 5.25 crores per annum” (to the community).
Krimson also undertook the responsibility and obligation to construct a brand new hospital at an estimated cost of Rs 46 crores and hand it over at the end of the term to the PLIH Trust.
From Turel, the MC received no detailed proposal but only an expression of interest specifying his intention to restrict the use of the Hospital for members of the Parsi Irani Zoroastrian community which the MC believes "is not workable.”
The date set for filing of consent terms in the writ petition was June 16, but the BPP wanted three weeks more time to which the MC agreed. The MC urged the trustees to advise Mehta "to refrain from creating unnecessary hindrances in the consummation of the above settlement. We regret to state that his conduct over the last few weeks has been antithetical to the settlement and appear to be aimed at unraveling our joint efforts. We hope you the trustee body will prevail over him and ensure that he abides by the decision of the trustee body on the settlement reached in the above matters.”
Email dated May 19, 2014 from Mehta to PLIH MC members and BPP trustees
BCH has sent us the offer on 8-5-2014 and only a copy of it is sent to managing committee only for information on 14-5-2014. Hence you are requested to involve the trustees in any negotiations you conduct with them and no direct or exclusive dealings be done with them without the presence of the trustees.
It is irrelevant to whom the letter dated May 8, 2014 was sent and copied by BCH. The matter of relevance is whether the offer contained in the said letter merits consideration or not. We have already sent a response on our views regarding the offer from BCH as well as the offer from Dr Turel and we will be happy to elaborate on the same at the joint meeting of the trustees and committee members that is proposed to be convened by the trustees shortly.
We have expressed our goodwill by settling the Originating Summons No. 1598 of 2012 and Writ Petition No. 938 of 2013 with the trustees and will always act in a reasonable manner.
Email dated June 5, 2014 from Mehta to PLIH MC members (barring Kersi Randeria) and BPP trustees
I wish to bring to your attention a very distressing piece of information for your knowledge and action.
As you are aware there has been a vertical split between the trustees of the BPP since November 2013. Unfortunately on May 26, 2014 at about 2.50 p.m. I received a telephone call from your Managing Committee member, Kersi Randeria… on my mobile number… who verbally abused me and threatened my life with dire consequences and made the same threats to my family including my wife and children. He has threatened to "finish me off.”
Earlier some time at the Parukh Dharamshalla meeting I had written to the Ladies’ Committee of the Parukh Dharamshalla of certain unbecoming acts of (BPP) trustee Arnavaz Mistry regarding impropriety of assets inquiry including a legal notice from an advocate of a lady resident and complaints against her high-handedness received from several residents of the Dharamshalla. To this letter, I received a call from Randeria threatening to attack me and my family in retaliation of my disclosing facts of "his family member, Arnavaz,” to the Ladies’ Committee since Randeria shares an extremely close personal relationship and a business association with the Mistry family.
Apart from verbal abuse, he also threatened to use the Parsi Times newspaper, of which he is the proprietor to write defamatory articles against me and my family. In Saturday’s newspaper edition dated May 31, 2014, the paper published slanderous articles against me and brutally assailed members of my family.
Anyone who uses threats to life as an intimidating tactic toward one’s family cannot be treated with dignity and respect and with this I humbly request the MC to desist Randeria from replying to any correspondence or attending any joint meeting between the MC of the PLIH and the trustees of the BPP for a smoother negotiation process between our two institutions.
Email dated June 7, 2014 from Randeria to PLIH MC members and BPP trustees
I have been forwarded Mehta’s email of June 5, 2014 which rather conveniently was not marked to me.
Mehta’s ability to twist facts never fails to astound me. However the facts of the matter are as under:
A without prejudice meeting had been scheduled between the PLIH committee members and the trustees of the BPP on Tuesday May 27, 2014. It appeared difficult to hold the proposed meeting on that day as some of our members were travelling and Bhagwagar’s father was in the ICU (intensive care unit). So as to avoid any problems, I called Mehta on the phone and had, what I believed to be, a pleasant and to the point conversation. As the decision to postpone the meeting did not get resolved, I sent an email late in the evening requesting the postponement of the same by two weeks. In reply to that email Mehta wrote back insisting that the meeting should go on irrespective of how many of the PLIH committee members were unable to attend. This email was not marked to me and was brought to my attention by one of our committee members. Therefore, after speaking to some of our committee members, I sent another email on the 27th informing all concerned that the meeting stood postponed and once again requesting that the meeting be held after two weeks. This was on the afternoon of May 27, 2014, the day of the meeting itself.
Having addressed the issue of the phone call and the postponement of the scheduled meeting I will now reply to the rest of the contents of Mehta’s email.
Mehta is currently in a minority of one as far as the issue of settling and filing of consent terms in the PLIH case is concerned. In the meeting between the BPP trustees and the PLIH committee members it is relevant to note that other than Mehta, all the BPP trustees have agreed and have found a solution to this long standing problem. Mehta was the lone voice of dissent when the vote to file consent terms was taken.
Mehta’s actions thereafter are on record.
We received "offer letters” from the BCH and Dr Turel. Whereas no aspersions can be cast on those who made the offers it appears that there is a concerted effort to stall the settlement and filing of the consent terms.
Soon thereafter, PLIH committee member Maneck Engineer was sought to be brought into the controversy, by pulling out correspondence which was 10 years old. Anonymous emails sent by some individual (from an email ID not in his own name) then started appearing. Surprisingly the writer, as per his emails, had all the information and documents which were available only with the BPP trustees and the PLIH committee members.
Next came the attack on PLIH committee member Bhagwagar, with Mehta insisting that Bhagwagar should be recused by the PLIH committee members.
Now, as per his latest email, Mehta insists that I should not be permitted to either correspond or attend any meetings on behalf of the PLIH, based on his intelligent but unsubstantiated allegations.
If Mehta is allowed to continue on this path, soon there may be just one member of the PLIH Committee "permitted” by him and probably none of the BPP trustees left to file the consent terms, which is probably Mehta’s dream.
As stated earlier, all of Mehta’s actions, comments, emails, etc are to be noted only as his individual and personal views, without any official sanction. By his own admission there is a split in the BPP board and in this matter particularly, he is in a minority of one. It would therefore be appropriate and time saving to ignore his personal views and opinions and file the consent terms in the larger interest of the community to settle this issue, rather than involve our trusts in expensive litigation, which has been the view expressed by both sides.
Finally, to address Mehta’s concern about the Parsi Times — Mehta’s reference to a letter written by him attacking his colleague Arnavaz Mistry is an extraneous matter, not connected to the present discussion or issue. For the record, let me state that I have not seen the letter Mehta is referring to, till date. However his reference to the letter is once again a credit to his intelligence (and) his capability to mix and match issues, as per his convenience. His personal and perverted references do not merit a reply as one would be hard pressed to stoop to his level to deal with such despicable references.
What is probably more relevant, if not critical, is to take note of the dates of events listed by him. He states that I called him on May 26, 2014 and threatened him and his family. He alleges that he was verbally abused by me, his life was threatened with dire consequences and the same threats were made to his family, including his wife and children. He also says that I threatened to finish him off. This according to him was on the 26th at 2.50 p.m.
He has then gone on to refer to an article published in the Parsi Times in which was published, in his words, slanderous articles against him and which had brutally assaulted members of his family. I have now read the so-called brutal and slanderous article against him and his family. The article is actually based on an email sent by Mehta’s colleague trustee (name Khojeste?) reminding him that he had only won the last election due to the support that was extended to him by WAPIZ. This article appeared on May 31, 2014.
Mehta’s email is dated June 5, 2014.
It is relevant to note that Mehta did not react when I supposedly threatened him and his family. He reacted only after an article appeared in the Parsi Times (which was based on an email written by another BPP trustee). Obviously only after the Parsi Times article appeared, Mehta decided to concoct this incredible story in his own inimitable style of what he thinks is counter attack.
I firmly believe that Mehta will not spare any efforts to try and sabotage the filing of the consent terms — not because he believes it to be against the interests of the community, not because he is confident that a better offer can be obtained — but only because the agreement was entered into without his "active” involvement. Since he has been reduced to a minority of one in the BPP board and there is absolute unanimity amongst the PLIH committee members he will continue his tirades against one and all. He will also use all his available resources to stall and or sabotage this effort.
I believe it should be Mehta who should recuse himself if he cannot accept the present situation or he should reserve his comments and abide by the decision of the majority of the BPP board, as he is legally bound to do.
If he does not, then we should all look forward to more fairy tales, more vicious attacks by him and his cronies, more anonymous emails, etc.
Finally, I have duly noted Mehta’s admission of two independent and separate institutions viz BPP and PLIH Charitable Trust, a fact which has been denied by him on oath which would amount to committing perjury.
Email dated June 10, 2014 from Mistree to Bhagwagar
Thank you for your email dated June 10, 2014, which I just read. Surprisingly, none of us have received Mehta’s email dated June10, 2014, which ostensibly is also copied to us. As a matter of interest, I have spoken to Jimmy, Arnavaz and Yazdi and they were equally surprised to read Mehta’s email in which all sorts of allegations have been made by him, against Randeria. We all agreed that we should not be drawn into any personal or internal clashes between two individuals. We four, would certainly like to invite all the members of the MC of the PLIH, so that we can move towards an amicable settlement, on the lines that we have been working on.
We look forward to meeting all your members including Randeria at 7 p.m. for a free and frank "without prejudice” meeting, this evening.
(The June 10 meeting was described by an eyewitness as "stormy but (one that) ended well.” — editors)
Disclosure: Parsiana is a party to a suit for eviction filed by the BPP regarding the PLIH premises.