由诺埃尔·塔塔担任主席的拉坦·塔塔爵士信托基金会已向马哈拉施特拉邦慈善事务专员说明，由于5月15日发布的命令禁止该基金会举行会议，因此无法对梅赫利·米斯特里提出的投诉作出回应。米斯特里对基金会的这一立场表示反对，指责其故意拖延处理进程。
The Sir Ratan Tata Trust , chaired by Noel Tata, has told the Maharashtra Charity Commissioner that it cannot respond to a complaint filed by Mehli Mistry because a May 15 order bars it from holding meetings. Mistry has opposed the trust’s position, alleging that it is deliberately delaying the proceedings.
米斯特里于6月5日提出异议，对有关“不再续聘其担任拉坦·塔塔爵士信托基金会及多拉布吉·塔塔爵士信托基金会理事”的决定提出异议。原本定于7月27日、9月8日及10月15日举行听证会，但该基金会至今仍未提交回应材料。
Mistry filed his objection on June 5, challenging filings that recorded the decision not to renew his term as a trustee of SRTT and Sir Dorabji Tata Trust . The matter was listed for hearings on July 27, September 8 and October 15, but SRTT has yet to submit its response.
在10月15日的听证会上，基金会坚称专员命令具有法律约束力；除非相关限制措施被解除，或案件无需开会即可审结，否则基金会无法批准提交回复。米斯特里的代理律师则指出，提交回复并不等同于对基金会运作方式或董事会构成作出决定。他们还强调，该基金会直至9月和10月才试图对相关命令提出异议，而这些命令早在5月份就已发布。
At the October 15 hearing, SRTT maintained that the commissioner’s orders were binding and that it could not approve a reply unless the restrictions were lifted or the matter was concluded without a meeting. Mistry’s lawyers argued that filing a response would not amount to a decision on the trust’s functioning or the composition of its board. They also pointed out that SRTT had sought to challenge the orders only in September and October, several months after they were issued in May.
此前，该基金会在9月份曾请求延期以更换理事，随后又以专员命令为由解释为何迟迟未回应米斯特里的投诉。
The trust had sought time in September to substitute a trustee before citing the orders to explain its delay in responding to Mistry’s complaint.
米斯特里在质疑什么？米斯特里对去年10月理事会作出的“不再续聘其担任两家信托基金会理事”的决定提出异议。他还就信托基金会的治理问题提出质疑，包括塔塔集团旗下企业向理事支付的酬劳以及潜在的利益冲突问题。其质疑内容还涉及诺埃尔·塔塔从塔塔集团领取的酬劳，以及维杰·辛格与韦努·斯里尼瓦桑担任理事的资格问题。两家信托基金会均对米斯特里的指控予以否认。米斯特里本人则表示并无重新获聘为理事的意愿。
What is Mistry challenging? Mistry is contesting the trustees’ decision last October not to renew his term at SRTT and SDTT. He has also raised governance concerns, including fees paid to trustees by Tata Group companies and potential conflicts of interest. His objections include the fees Noel Tata receives from Tata Sons and the eligibility of trustees Vijay Singh and Venu Srinivasan to serve on one of the trusts. The trusts have contested his allegations. Mistry has said he is not seeking reappointment to either trust.
为何5月15日的命令至关重要？该命令源于另一项针对拉坦·塔塔爵士信托基金会董事会的投诉，投诉称该基金会有过多理事拥有终身任职资格。
Why the May 15 order mattersThe May 15 order arose from a separate complaint concerning SRTT’s board, which alleged that too many trustees held permanent positions.
SRTT称该命令属于单方命令，即在未听取另一方意见的情况下作出的决定。由于无法召开会议，约4亿卢比的拨款也因此被搁置。该命令还导致塔塔 Sons 年度股东大会被迫延期。
SRTT has described the order as ex parte, meaning it was passed without hearing the other side, and said around ₹400 crore in grants had been held up because it could not hold meetings. The order also led to the adjournment of the Tata Sons annual general meeting.
其他信托机构也已提交回复：SDTT与巴伊·希拉拜信托于10月15日向慈善事务专员提交了回复。巴伊·希拉拜信托告知专员，维杰·辛格已不再担任信托理事，诺埃尔·塔塔接替了他的职位。此前，米斯特里曾对辛格担任信托理事的资格提出质疑。根据该信托1923年订立的章程，其理事必须为琐罗亚斯德教徒；此前韦努·斯里尼瓦桑也已卸任，如今他和辛格均不再是巴伊·希拉拜信托的理事。
SRTT与SDTT合计持有塔塔 Sons 超过50%的股份。
Other trusts file repliesSDTT and Bai Hirabai Trust filed their replies with the Charity Commissioner on October 15. Bai Hirabai Trust informed the commissioner that Vijay Singh was no longer a trustee and that Noel Tata had replaced him. Mistry had challenged Singh’s eligibility to serve on the trust. The trust’s 1923 deed requires its trustees to be Zoroastrians. Venu Srinivasan had earlier stepped down, and neither he nor Singh is now a trustee of Bai Hirabai Trust.SRTT and SDTT together own more than 50% of Tata Sons.
后续进展如何？SDTT定于10月19日对韦努·斯里尼瓦桑提出的另一项投诉作出回应。SRTT相关案件的下一次听证会定于11月5日举行，届时米斯特里需作出回应。
What happens next?SDTT is due to respond on October 19 to a separate complaint filed by Venu Srinivasan. The next hearing in the SRTT matter is scheduled for November 5, when Mistry is due to respond.