“Priests in the dark”

This has reference to the letter by B. T. Dastur titled "Priests in the dark” (Readers’ Forum, Parsiana, April 21, 2015) and the rejoinder thereto by Jamsheed Kanga. To use Kanga’s own words: "The main issue in this case was the interpretation of the powers of the trustees.”
While appreciating the efforts of Kanga and Homi Khusrokhan in this regard, nonetheless three questions arise from Kanga’s clarification. First, why did no one think of seeking Court interpretation of the powers of Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) trustees as per objects of the trust deed until the two priests were banned? Second, had Ervads Framroze Mirza and Khushroo Madon not been banned by the BPP trustees, would Kanga have approached the Court for legal interpretation of the BPP’s trust deed? Third, in the legal proceedings, was the issue of two banned priests not cited during the arguments, pleadings and as exhibits (documentary evidence)?
PHIROZ DUBASH
dubashapnd@hotmail.com

The editors reply:
The Court’s interpretation has to be sought on a particular issue. It cannot be a general opinion. Trustees have some powers; whether they have exceeded these is a matter for the courts to decide.
The case evolved around the ban and the powers of the trustees under the trust deed. Whatever was relevant to the case was cited.