A vacation bench of the Bombay High Court has disposed of a petition challenging the constitution of Sir Ratan Tata Trusts after it was withdrawn by the petitioner. According to reports from Mint, a two-judge bench comprising Justice Advait M. Sethna and Justice Sadesh Dadasaheb Patil made the decision on Wednesday regarding the petition filed by Suresh Tulsiram Patilkhede, a 61-year-old resident of Thane. The court expressed displeasure that the petitioner sought urgent judicial intervention while his formal complaints regarding board-composition limits under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act remained unresolved by the regulator. The petitioner's counsel, taking note of the concerns raised by the Bombay HC, proceeded with withdrawing the plea, with the court allowing the withdrawal of the petition. As per NDTV Profit, the bench noted that the petitioner has not been fair and observed that the plea failed to identify the original complainant in the underlying case before the Charity Commissioner.
Patilkhede had first made a representation before the Bombay High Court last month, alleging that three of six trustees of Sir Ratan Tata Trusts (SRTT), including chairman Noel Tata, Pune philanthropist Jehangir HC Jehnagir, and the late Ratan Tata's brother Jimmy Tata, were permanent trustees. As reported by Mint, this allegedly violated rules that capped the number of lifetime trustees at a fourth of the total number of trustees. The plea claimed that Jimmy Tata, Noel Tata and J N Mistry were serving as lifetime trustees on the Sir Ratan Tata Trust board, resulting in perpetual trustees accounting for half of the board strength, which allegedly violated the statutory cap of 25 percent. The petition had also sought a declaration that decisions taken after September 2025 would be invalid unless the boards were restructured in line with the law. According to NDTV Profit, the petition argued that the amended Maharashtra Public Trust Act bars the count of perpetual trustees exceeding one-fourth of the total number of trustees, unless the trust's instrument expressly mandates it.
During the hearing, a division bench questioned the maintainability of the petition, noting that the petitioner was not the original complainant in proceedings pending before the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner. The court also pointed out that the petition did not disclose the identity of the original complainant. The judges repeatedly questioned the petitioner's locus standi — the legal right to bring a matter before the court, with Justice Patil orally observing that the petition appeared more like a caveat — effectively a pre-emptive objection — than a challenge arising from an actual board decision. Senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Janak Dwarkadas, appearing for some trustees, argued that the petitioner was neither a beneficiary nor a trustee of SRTT and therefore lacked standing to challenge the board's functioning. They also argued that treating the 2025 amendment as retrospective rather than prospective could have sweeping consequences for thousands of trusts across Maharashtra, with the Maharashtra government having already clarified through a notification that the amendment would apply prospectively.
As reported by Mint, SDTT and SRTT control 51.4% of Tata Sons, while six smaller trusts own another 14.36%, taking their total ownership in the apex Tata company to 65.9%. The legal challenges have emerged when differences among Tata Trusts trustees have come to light, with Noel Tata opposing the reappointment of TVS chairman emeritus Venu Srinivasan and another trustee at Tata Education and Development Trust (TEDT). The challenge centred on alleged non-compliance with Section 30A(2) of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act relating to the proportion of permanent trustees permitted on trust boards. With the legal challenge dropped, Tata Trusts can now proceed with its May 16 meeting to reorganise its nominees on the Tata Sons board.
The dispute first surfaced ahead of a scheduled May 8 SRTT board meeting expected to discuss issues including the possible listing of Tata Sons, the future of trustee Venu Srinivasan on the Tata Sons board, and the reappointment of N Chandrasekaran as chairman of Tata Sons. That meeting was later rescheduled to May 16. The petition had raised objections over the composition of the SRTT board, arguing that the original trust deed and codicil dating back to 1916 did not expressly permit life trustees, while the September 2025 amendment capped perpetual trustees at one-fourth of total board strength. The SRTT board currently has six trustees - Jimmy Naval Tata, Jehangir HC Jehangir, Noel Naval Tata, Venu Srinivasan, Vijay Singh and Darius Khambata. The bench noted that the Charity Commissioner was already examining the issue, with Dwarkadas adding that the SRTT board had held at least four meetings since September 2025 without objection from the petitioner, who had approached the court only now.
