The charity commissioner of Maharashtra — the state regulator for public trusts and charities — has written to Tata Trusts regarding the affidavit filed by former trustee Mehli Mistry. The Trusts office received on Tuesday afternoon the letter asking for a response to allegations set forth in the affidavit submitted by Mistry in late February.
This is the latest development in the ongoing turmoil at Tata Trusts, where Mistry served as a trustee until his ouster in late 2025.
In his appeal to the charity commissioner, Mistry formally challenged the appointment of two trustees, Venu Srinivasan and former defence secretary Vijay Singh to the board of Bai Hirabai Jamsetji Tata Navsari Charitable Institution (BHJTNCI). While Srinivasan cited professional commitments and stepped down from the board in April, Singh continues to be a trustee as of date.
Also on Tuesday, Trusts Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Siddharth Sharma wrote to the trustees clarifying that while he did reach out to the two trustees in question, he did not ask them to resign from their posts. Sharma’s letter comes on the back of reports that he asked Singh and Srinivasan to resign following the news of Mistry’s allegations, and that he misrepresented the facts, most significantly the legal opinion of former chief justice of India H J Kania.
What has Mistry alleged?
Mistry in his petition has alleged that the appointment of Singh and Srinivasan violates the provisions in the trust deed which requires all trustees to be of Parsi Zoroastrian faith, and residents of Mumbai or Navsari. BHJTNCI is part of the Sir Ratan Tata Trusts and Allied Trusts but does not directly play role in the governing of Tata Sons, the holding entity of the Tata Group companies.
Mistry has framed the dispute as criminal, alleging ineligible individuals unlawfully acted as trustees, gaining control through misrepresentation. The affidavit claims that Singh and Srinivasan’s actions amount to cheating, fraud and breach of trust under law.
Sharma’s letter on Tuesday informed trustees that he spoke to Singh and Srinivasan and gave them the option to “voluntarily step down”, but did not urge or force them to. He also told them that while the Trusts will seek legal opinion in the matter, he did not, at the time of speaking to the two, have any legal consultation on hand.
Queries regarding both developments sent to Tata Trusts remained unanswered till press time.