Former Trustee Mehli Mistry Levels Serious Allegations Against Tata Trusts Leadership
In a dramatic legal escalation, former trustee Mehli Mistry has accused the leadership of Tata Trusts of operating an "illegal" board by selectively applying rules to secure their own lifetime trusteeships while orchestrating his removal. Mistry, who served as a trustee of both Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and Sir Ratan Tata Trust, has filed detailed submissions before the charity commissioner, demanding an independent administrator to replace the current board.
Allegations of Governance Violations and Procedural Irregularities
Mistry contends that the trust leadership engaged in multiple statutory violations, including counting votes of trustees whose tenures had expired and breaching appointment protocols. He specifically points to chairman Noel Tata, along with trustees Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh, alleging they violated a unanimously approved October 2024 resolution that permitted perpetual trusteeships.
"The selective compliance with the October 2024 resolution is legally impermissible," Mistry asserted in his filings, noting that while these individuals benefited from the arrangement, they opposed his reappointment and facilitated his removal from both trusts.
Legal Challenges to Lifetime Appointments
The former trustee has mounted a comprehensive legal challenge against the lifetime trustee appointments. He argues that Srinivasan was not a valid SDTT trustee during the vote for his reappointment, rendering the proceedings void. Furthermore, Mistry claims the trust failed to file mandatory disclosures with the charity commissioner regarding changes to board composition.
Regarding Noel Tata's reappointment as a life trustee in January 2025, Mistry contends it became invalid due to failure to file a mandatory change report within the prescribed 90-day window. On Srinivasan's reappointment in October 2025, Mistry cites Maharashtra's newly amended Public Trusts Act, which caps lifetime trustees at one-quarter of the total board when the founding document is silent on perpetual trustees.
Since the March 11, 1932 deed of SDTT made no provision for perpetual trustees, Mistry argues that Noel Tata's reappointment had already exhausted the statutory quota, making Srinivasan's October 2025 lifetime reappointment illegal.
Invalid Removal and Board Irregularities
Mistry maintains that his own removal in October 2025 was invalid because it relied on votes from an unlawfully constituted board, including participation by Srinivasan when he had ceased to be a trustee. He points to SDTT's subsequent actions as evidence of irregularity.
On November 11, 2025, SDTT removed Srinivasan as a perpetual trustee and reappointed him for a three-year term to comply with regulations. Mistry argues this amounts to an admission that the original lifetime appointment was void from the outset, rendering all resolutions passed between October 23, 2025 and November 11, 2025 invalid.
In a revealing footnote to an internal memo, trustees acknowledged that Srinivasan was not entitled to vote on an October 23, 2025 circular related to Mistry's reappointment. "SDTT's own conduct demonstrates systemic mismanagement and unlawful governance," Mistry stated.
Allegations of Financial Misconduct and Personal Benefits
Beyond governance issues, Mistry has leveled serious allegations of financial misconduct against specific trustees. He claims Vijay Singh received over Rs 20 crore in commissions from Tata Sons and other Tata companies between FY2015 and FY2025 while serving as nominee director. Mistry argues such remuneration should accrue to SDTT rather than be retained personally and has sought recovery with interest.
Regarding Venu Srinivasan, Mistry alleges he used resources of JLR, a Tata firm, for personal benefit, including engaging former design chief Gerry McGovern for consultancy work linked to Norton Motorcycles, which is part of his TVS Group. McGovern was reportedly dismissed from JLR in December 2025. Mistry has also sought disclosure on payments made to JLR for services.
Broader Context and Recent Developments
Mistry's Wednesday move follows closely on his previous challenge to the eligibility of Srinivasan, Singh and other trustees of the Bai Hirabai J N Tata Navsari Charitable Institution on grounds of non-Zoroastrian status and non-Mumbai residency. After that challenge, Srinivasan resigned while Singh continues to remain on the board.
The former trustee has urged the charity commissioner to reject the report formalizing his removal from the trusts, alleging systemic mismanagement and calling for comprehensive governance reforms. His allegations represent one of the most significant internal challenges to Tata Trusts' leadership in recent years, with potential implications for one of India's most prominent philanthropic organizations.
