Tata Trusts Row: Venu Srinivasan, Vijay Singh Say They Were Not Consulted On Tata Sons Reorganisation Plan

Sir Dorabji Tata Trust (SDTT) vice-chairmen and trustees Venu Srinivasan and Vijay Singh have said they were not consulted before Tata Trusts sent a September 28 letter to the Tata Sons board proposing a reorganisation of the holding company.

As per a report by Business Standard, in a September 30 letter to SDTT trustees, the two said they were surprised to receive a copy of the communication and learn about the related press release through public sources.

They said no SDTT trustees’ meeting was held to discuss the proposal before it was sent to Tata Sons.

Trustees question process behind proposal

The September 28 communication, issued by Tata Trusts as majority shareholders of Tata Sons, asked the company’s board to consider merging Tata Electronics Systems Solutions and Tata Consulting Engineers with Tata Sons.

The proposed restructuring seeks to give Tata Sons operating businesses and revenue, allowing it to cease being classified as a non-banking financial company or core investment company and potentially avoid a stock market listing.

Srinivasan and Singh also questioned the issuance of statements in the name of Tata Trusts without consultation or authorisation from SDTT trustees. They said neither the letter nor the press release could be treated as the collective institutional position of SDTT because no meeting had authorised them.

The trustees said shareholders could communicate their views or proposals to a company, but the Tata Sons board was responsible for independently examining the proposal and assessing its legal, regulatory, financial and commercial implications.

RBI decision adds to regulatory questions

The two trustees said the proposed merger involved operating companies, regulatory approvals and surrender of Tata Sons’ certificate of registration, warranting detailed examination before any position was taken in the trust’s name.

They also raised concerns over the charitable status of SDTT and Sir Ratan Tata Trust if their communications were interpreted as directing commercial decisions at Tata Sons rather than exercising shareholder rights.

The trustees referred to the Reserve Bank of India’s September 11 response rejecting Tata Sons’ application to surrender its certificate of registration and directing it to comply with norms applicable to an NBFC-Upper Layer.

They said the RBI’s decision meant earlier decisions taken in 2025 could not be treated as final and that Tata Sons should reassess its available options.

Srinivasan and Singh further questioned the assertion that the proposed restructuring would be in the best interests of Tata Sons, the Tata Group and its stakeholders. They said the financial, governance and institutional consequences needed collective consideration by SDTT trustees before any decision was taken.