A big update has come out regarding the tenure of trustees in Tata Trusts.
New updates are continuously coming regarding the tenure of the trustees of Tata Trust. This issue is becoming bigger every day. Now the big update that has come is quite surprising. People familiar with the matter said in media reports that Tata Trusts has postponed the change regarding the tenure of its trustees. This decision has been taken on the basis of legal advice. According to legal advice, Maharashtra’s recent ordinance does not clearly state that the changes mandated in it will be applicable retrospectively.
The Maharashtra Public Trusts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025 has added a new section, 30A(2) to the law governing trusts. It has limited the number of permanent trustees to one-fourth of the total capacity of the trust. This will have an immediate impact on Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT) and Tata Education and Development Trust (TEDT), where at least half of the trustees have permanent status. The new rule came into effect from September 1, 2025 and under this, existing trusts are required to maintain this limit at all times.
Close scrutiny of trustee appointments
This recent stand of Tata Trusts is based on a legal opinion which it had sought for all the trusts under it. This comes at a time when the appointments of trustees are being intensely scrutinized following allegations by Mehli Mistry earlier this month of procedural violations, selective reliance on previous resolutions, ignoring binding decisions, conflict of interest and breach of fiduciary duty. The people cited above said in the ET report that Tata Trusts has not received any queries on the matter from the authorities, and if the authorities approach them formally on the matter, they will respond appropriately. Legal experts are divided on the scope of this ordinance.
Does the ordinance apply to existing appointments or not?
Ashish K, Managing Partner, Capstone Legal. Singh said in the ET report that the ordinance does not say that it is limited to future appointments only. He said that the provisions specifically refer to the existing trust deed and tenure. He said in the report that this ordinance also covers previous appointments.
He said that it is a general rule that, unless specifically mentioned, any ordinance is considered prospective in nature (coming into force from a future date). However, the original text of the Ordinance specifically mentions present and future appointments in relation to the existing trust deed. No official statement has come from Tata Trusts in this matter.
The executives said there could be legal consequences on the validity of decisions taken by the boards of SRTT and TEDT. Tata Trusts has a controlling stake of 66 per cent in the group’s holding company, Tata Sons. Most of its shares are with SRTT (23.6 percent) and Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (28 percent). Mehli Mistry had demanded the appointment of an administrator to oversee the functioning of Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT).
Who are the trustees in Tata Trust?
SRTT currently has five trustees, three of whom have permanent status—Jimmy Tata, Noel Tata and Jahangir Jahangir. Jimmy Tata has been serving since 1989, while the remaining two joined in 2019. TEDT also has three life trustees—Jahangir Mistry, Mehli Mistry and Noel Tata. The tenure of Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh will come up for renewal in June. Venu Srinivasan, who was appointed life trustee in October 2025, was re-appointed for a three-year term in November 2025, as the trust said the amended law supersedes any resolution passed after September 2025.
Will the law apply to future appointments?
Ankita Singh, managing partner of Sarvank Associates, said in the ET report that the established principle of legal interpretation is that laws are considered prospective (applicable forward), unless they are made retrospective (applicable backward) through express words or clear indication. He said that where an ordinance imposes term limits on posts that were previously for life, courts generally favor prospective application to avoid automatically removing existing incumbents. Singh said that while the ordinance is silent on its application to existing tenures, it is generally seen as a prospective one that applies to new appointments or future vacancies, and not as a means of immediately removing those currently holding the post.
