Noel Tata and three trustees challenged the vice-chairmen’s support for listing Tata Sons.
Their letter alleged public statements undermined resolutions favouring keeping the company private.
The dispute also involves consultation over restructuring and undisclosed charity commissioner complaints.
The dispute within Tata Trusts has widened, with chairman Noel Tata and three fellow trustees accusing vice-chairmen Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh of publicly backing a Tata Sons listing without first discussing the proposal with them.
In a five-page letter sent on Monday, the four trustees challenged the pair’s departure from the Trusts’ longstanding position that Tata Sons should remain private. They also alleged that their public statements undermined earlier resolutions and amounted to a “breach of fiduciary duties”.
The letter was signed by Noel Tata, Neville Noel Tata, former Titan chief executive Bhaskar Bhat and lawyer Darius Khambata, according to an executive who had seen it. It places four trustees against two within the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT), which holds a 27.98% stake in Tata Sons.
Trustees Question Change In Listing Position
“The position that Tata Sons should remain an unlisted company has been the settled position of the Trusts, and of Tata Sons itself, for years,” the letter said, according to the executive.
The signatories cited a Tata Sons board decision taken “under the guidance of the late Mr Ratan N. Tata” and Trust resolutions passed on May 28 and July 28, 2025, with Srinivasan and Singh participating.
They described the pair’s subsequent support for a listing in April interviews as an “epiphany” and questioned why they had approached the media before their fellow trustees.
The letter said neither had advocated an IPO at the three SDTT board meetings held since April.
“Your conduct as trustees has not indicated any inclination to deliberate on this existential issue with your co-trustees,” the signatories wrote.
Tata Sons Board Vote Deepens Divisions
The disagreement intensified on September 17, when Tata Sons board members outvoted Noel Tata to approve a third term for chairman N Chandrasekaran and begin the process towards a public listing. Srinivasan supported the resolutions, while Noel opposed them.
On September 28, Tata Trusts proposed merging two Tata Sons subsidiaries to remove its classification as a core investment company and a non-banking financial company. Singh and Srinivasan alleged two days later that the proposal had been made without consulting them.
The four trustees countered that the Tata Sons board had asked the Trusts to examine options for complying with the RBI’s communication. Srinivasan had attended that meeting and participated in the discussion, they said.
They maintained that the proposal responded to the board’s request rather than encroaching on its responsibilities.
Trustees Reject Claims Of Interference In Tata Sons
The signatories also questioned Singh and Srinivasan’s calls for collective deliberation, saying the pair had not disclosed their complaints to the charity commissioner about the Trusts’ functioning.
“We obtained copies from the office of the charity commissioner on 1 October 2026. So much for your professed preference for deliberation within the Trusts,” the letter said.
It alleged that speaking publicly against the settled position weakened both the Trusts’ resolutions and Tata Sons’ pending application before the RBI.
Rejecting allegations that the Trusts were running the holding company, the trustees wrote: “The Trusts do not run Tata Sons and do not seek to.”
They said the Tata Sons shareholding was the Trusts’ principal asset and funded their charitable activities. Protecting it through rights conferred by Tata Sons’ Articles of Association, including affirmative voting rights for Trust-nominated directors under Articles 118 and 121, was stewardship of Trust property, they argued.
