Inside Track: Modifying Minority Group

The recently appointed Parsi representative of the Minorities Commission, Berjis Desai, a lawyer and author of Modi’s Mission, believes the Tata controversy does not fall within his brief, as the Tata Trusts are secular charities.

Parsi community initially was largely silent over what many others perceived  as a Tamil Brahmin backdoor takeover of the 150-year-old quintessentially Parsi business house, Tata Sons, without purchasing a single share. (File)

5 min readNov 1, 2026 07:00 AM IST First published on: Nov 1, 2026 at 07:00 AM IST

In the 1990s, when the Essar group attempted a takeover of the Tamilnad Mercantile Bank, the Nadar community protested what it termed a “Marwari outsider’’ acquisition of their bank. Even though Essar had purchased the majority of the shares, the RBI refused to let the group control the bank’s management. In contrast, the Parsi community initially was largely silent over what many others perceived  as a Tamil Brahmin backdoor takeover of the 150-year-old quintessentially Parsi business house, Tata Sons, without purchasing a single share.

The recently appointed Parsi representative of the Minorities Commission, Berjis Desai, a lawyer and author of Modi’s Mission, believes the Tata controversy does not fall within his brief, as the Tata Trusts are secular charities. Former commission member Kersi Deboo, however, disagrees, pointing out that the major achievement during his tenure was reclaiming community properties in Valsad, Navsari, Thane, Bharuch, Surat and elsewhere from encroachers, including government agencies. Last week, Deboo wrote to PM Modi, urging protection for the Tata group’s philanthropic legacy and charitable shareholding. He was not seeking an exemption from the law, but requesting that the law be applied fairly. Six major Parsi and Zoroastrian organisations, in India and abroad, have finally woken up and written to the government, objecting to recent attempts to undermine the renowned Parsi business house.

The Gujarati-speaking Parsis’ initial complacent carelessness was perhaps because they assumed that  Modi and Amit Shah have a special affection for their community, which, unlike most minorities, supported Modi in 2014. It has come as a rude shock that the PM has not intervened in the messy Tata impasse. Business circles view as significant the fact that the Ministry of External Affairs arranged a meeting last fortnight between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and N Chandrasekaran whose reappointment as chairman of Tata Sons has been challenged before the Company Law Board — and not Noel Tata, the bona fide head of the Tata Trusts (After his retirement as Foreign Secretary, S. Jaishankar worked for the Tatas for a year).  RBI Governor Sanjay Malhotra’s recent public comment on the Tata’s need to list was certainly unorthodox too. The elephant in the room actually is not listing alone, but the insidious attempt by the Maharashtra charities’ commissioner to bar the two main Tata trusts from voting on the group chairman’s dubious appointment, citing hastily drafted and legally ambiguous amendments to the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act that were rushed through the state legislature 2025-end.

Halal Style, not Jhatka

There have been no major upheavals in PM Modi’s Cabinet since July 2021, when Ravi Shankar Prasad, Prakash Javadekar and Harsh Vardhan were abruptly dropped. Although the media has frequently speculated on  ministerial reshuffles in the offing, since June 2024, in Modi 3.0, there have been only minor changes at the MoS level. The only jhatka was the forced ouster of Dharmendra Pradhan in July in the wake of the students’ agitation. Ministers of state George Kurian and Ravneet Singh Bittu quietly demitted office after their Rajya Sabha terms were not renewed and returned to their home states — ostensibly for party work. L Murugan resigned his Rajya Sabha seat from Madhya Pradesh last month to return to Tamil Nadu. Harsh Malhotra and Pankaj Chaudhary officially continue as MoS, though their key task is as state BJP presidents in Delhi and UP, respectively. Petroleum Minister Hardeep Puri, whose name has been linked to Jeffrey Epstein, appeared to have been put on notice when he was denied an extension last month for UP’s Rajya Sabha nomination. But Puri finally won a reprieve and was accommodated as BJP candidate for the Rajya Sabha seat vacated by Murugan. Puri has denied the Epstein allegations, saying their meetings were entirely professional.

Retiring the Rules

The PM’s seeming reluctance to make ministerial changes is reflected in his penchant for retaining top  bureaucrats long after their official retirement. In August 2024, when Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan was to retire, the Cabinet Committee on Appointments granted him an extension till August 2026. He has since been asked to continue till August 2027. Home Secretary Govind Mohan has received two extensions of a year each and will continue till August next year. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri was granted a 19-month extension after superannuation on November 30, 2024, followed by another waiver till July 2027. The chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ravi Agrawal, was due to retire in September 2024. After two extensions, he will continue in this position till December 2026. The increasingly common practice of extending the tenures of favoured officers affects the morale of the services, depriving those next in line of seniority of an opportunity to occupy the top slot, a cherished ambition of all bureaucrats.