Mehli Mistry Appointed as Charity Commissioner Amid Review of Tata-Linked Trust Board Composition

Mehli Mistry Challenges Tata-Linked Charity Trust's Governance Structure

Mehli Mistry, a close associate of Ratan Tata and former trustee in the Tata Trusts network, has filed a petition with the Charity Commissioner over a change report concerning the Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution. Mistry's petition raises a broader question over the legal validity of the trust's present board of trustees, beyond the non-renewal of his own term.

According to the petition, the original trust deed dated December 7, 1923 prescribes mandatory qualifications for trustees. The conditions require that all trustees be Zoroastrians and permanent residents within the prescribed Bombay Presidency-Navsari jurisdiction. Mistry has alleged that at least two current trustees, Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh, were not qualified to act as trustees under the trust deed. He has specifically stated that they "have never been and cannot be of Parsi Zoroastrian faith" and therefore do not satisfy the deed's requirement that all trustees be Zoroastrians.

Mistry has also alleged that the two trustees do not have permanent residence in Mumbai. Based on these allegations, he claims their appointments were void ab initio and that any acts performed by them in their purported capacity as trustees are non-est in law. The filing thus takes the matter beyond a dispute over the renewal of one trustee's term and places the focus on the validity of the trust's present governance structure.

Read also: 60 Minutes' Future Under Scrutiny Amid CBS News Turmoil

Mistry's tenure as trustee was not renewed without any reason being assigned. However, the central thrust of the petition is that the board decision itself cannot stand if it was shaped by votes cast by ineligible trustees. The petition refers to Circular Resolution No. 671 dated October 23, 2025, which forms the basis of the change report under challenge.

Mistry's case is that if the votes of allegedly disqualified trustees are excluded, the basis of the resolution no longer holds. In effect, he has argued that the decision-making process was flawed because persons who were not legally entitled to sit on the board participated in it.

The petition uses strong language for a trust governance matter. It alleges fraud, cheating, criminal breach of trust, maladministration, mismanagement, and misrepresentation. It also contends that individuals who do not satisfy the conditions under the trust deed cannot lawfully accept or continue in trusteeship, particularly when trust property and authority vest in the hands of trustees.

Read also: Uber Driver Allegedly Assaults Passenger in Mumbai Over Unpaid Fare Dispute

Apart from raising questions over board composition, Mistry has also expressed concern over the trust's functioning. In the petition, he has said that no meetings have been held over the past two years. He has argued that this raises concerns over accountability, transparency, and compliance with the trust deed, besides creating risk around the handling of trust property.

Mistry has asked the Charity Commissioner to call for inspection of trust records and minutes and to seek affidavits from trustees confirming whether they satisfy the eligibility requirements, including faith and permanent residence. The petition also argues that if only validly qualified trustees are counted, the trust may effectively be left with fewer than the minimum five trustees required under the deed.

On that basis, Mistry has sought the appointment of an administrator in place of the current board. The filing makes it clear that the objective is not to seek Mistry's reinstatement but to bring to light what it describes as illegal functioning and maladministration and to protect the original purpose of the trust, which was created for the benefit of the Parsi community of Navsari.

The matter assumes significance because the challenge goes beyond one trustee's exit and raises questions over the legitimacy of the trust's present board structure. If the eligibility objections are upheld, board decisions taken during the period could come under scrutiny.