Tata trustees Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh have accused fellow trustee Darius Khambata of presenting an incomplete account of the dispute over Tata Sons' proposed listing, shifting the focus from regulatory compliance to questions about control and governance within Tata Trusts.
In a strongly worded letter dated November 11, the two trustees defended the Tata Sons board's September 17 decision and rejected Khambata's argument that listing would threaten the Tata model. They said the character of an institution depended on governance and accountability, not whether its shares traded publicly.
The trustees also disputed Khambata's criticism of Tata Sons' engagement with the Reserve Bank of India. They said discussions with the regulator began in 2023, followed by repayment of debt and an application to surrender its registration in March 2024.
Also Read | Layoffs Are Rising In Tech, But These Skills Are Helping People Unlock Better Pay
After a two-year review, the RBI concluded that Tata Sons remained a systemically significant financial institution and had to comply with the listing framework.
Srinivasan and Singh argued that the regulator's decision did not indicate inadequate representation. They cited TCS, Tata Steel, Tata Power and Tata Motors to challenge the claim that a listed company cannot pursue long-term investments. They also said the Trusts would retain their Tata Sons shareholding and continue receiving dividends to fund philanthropic activities.
Also Read | Tata Motors PV Q2 Results: PV Arm Swings To Loss On JLR Restructuring, Revenue Up 35%; Misses Estimates
Seven months of leadership uncertainty
A major part of the response concerns Tata Sons Chairman N. Chandrasekaran's reappointment. The trustees said both Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and Sir Ratan Tata Trust unanimously recommended another five-year term on July 28, 2025. They alleged that the decision was subsequently deferred in February 2026, leaving the group's leadership unresolved for seven months.
The letter questioned why Khambata did not oppose the departure from the earlier resolution. It also defended the September 17 board decision, saying the directors acted after prolonged uncertainty threatened the dignity of the chairman's office and the group's leadership stability.
The two trustees further challenged Khambata's interpretation of the Supreme Court's Tata-Mistry judgment. They said trust-nominated directors remained bound by their fiduciary duties to Tata Sons and could not simply vote according to the Trusts' instructions.
The response also raised concerns about changes to the composition of Sir Dorabji Tata Trust in November 2025, alleging that the process lacked unanimous consent.
Also Read | Tata Sons Rejects Noel Tata's Demand For Boardroom Recording, Defends TVS-Hanno Disclosures
The trustees concluded that the greater threat to the Tata model was the weakening of collective decision-making and concentration of authority, rather than a stock market listing. The exchange underscores the widening divisions over control, board independence and the future governance of Tata Sons.
Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.
