Tata Row Deepens: Dorabji Trust Files Caveat as Venu Srinivasan Targets It and Noel Tata

The dispute surrounding Tata Trusts has intensified after Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT) filed caveats with the Charity Commissioner following a complaint made by Tata Sons director and Tata Trusts trustee Venu Srinivasan.

The caveat has been filed to ensure that the trust is given an opportunity to present its case before the Charity Commissioner passes any order on Srinivasan’s complaint.

Srinivasan had written to the Commissioner’s office seeking an “immediate inquiry into the administration and governance of SDTT”. His complaint also raises questions about the appointment and continued status of the trust’s existing perpetual trustees.

The complaint has brought renewed attention to the governance structure of the Tata Trusts and the roles played by individual trustees.

According to the report, Srinivasan has also raised questions concerning Noel Tata and the basis on which he assumed and continues to hold his position within the trust structure.

The latest development comes amid disagreements within the Tata Trusts ecosystem over the functioning and governance of some of its charitable trusts.

The filing of a caveat by SDTT means that the trust wants to be heard before the Charity Commissioner takes any decision or passes an order on the issues raised in Srinivasan’s complaint.

Srinivasan is himself a trustee of Tata Trusts, adding another dimension to the dispute. The differences have drawn attention because of the important role Tata Trusts play within the wider Tata Group structure.

The governance structure of the trusts includes both perpetual trustees and trustees appointed for fixed terms. The report notes that Noel Tata is a perpetual trustee, while Srinivasan has a three-year tenure.

This difference in tenure has become part of the wider discussion surrounding the dispute. An insider cited in the report described Srinivasan as a “rebel” within the Tata Trusts ecosystem because of his position and the questions he has raised.

The Charity Commissioner’s office will now have to consider the complaint and the issues raised regarding the administration and governance of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust.

The caveat filed by the trust ensures that its side can be heard before any order is passed. The development could therefore lead to further scrutiny of the governance arrangements and trustee appointments within the charitable trust.

The dispute highlights the complex governance structure surrounding the Tata Trusts, where questions concerning trustee appointments, tenure and administration can have wider implications for the functioning of the philanthropic institutions associated with the Tata Group.