Some months ago Trustee Viraf Mehta was instrumental in spreading a rumour regarding a so-called “Ban” on Jam-e-Jamshed. The fact was, the Trustees, by a majority vote, had simply decided to stop advertising in that weekly because the rates were high. THERE WAS NO BAN!

In like manner, Trustee Viraf Mehta is now spreading a new canard – that by a majority decision, the Trustees have decided not to give him any minutes or access to files and other relevant information. THIS IS A BLATANT LIE!

Let’s get some facts across and respond to some of these myth and falsehoods:
1. Several files of the BPP have gone missing and in some cases, relevant pages or attachments in some files have disappeared. The new Board of Trustees has therefore taken corrective measures to plug security loopholes in the system. We have taken a policy decision to adopt a strict system whereby no file can be accessed by ANY Trustee (and not just trustee Viraf Mehta) without following a system and process. The object is to protect the integrity of sensitive data, especially in some of the old housing related files.

2. Any and every trustee may study a particular file. However, for that, the trustee must make a specific request to the Board or to the CEO, stating the reasons and as and when accessed, the same must be properly recorded in a log book. We have initiated this process particularly keeping in mind the fact, that recently, Viraf wanted the file of a housing applicant whose case is now approved and closed, but, where this housing applicant has recently filed a criminal complaint against Viraf’s father, Dinshaw Mehta. Why would trustee Viraf Mehta want the file of this applicant precisely at a time when his father has been accused of a criminal offence? We need say no more!

3. In recent history, on not less than three occasions, Viraf Mehta asked for files, which, in our opinion, he intended to (mis)use only to try and protect his father, and not the interest of the trust in his position as a Trustee of the BPP.

4. In one particular case, Viraf, with a view to help one of his father’s friend, decided to oppose the case being filed by the Trust! Viraf demanded the file and threatened the staff that he would take the file forcefully, if it was not given to him. The ‘reason’ for looking at the file could be to possibly remove relevant and critical documents which would be required by the trust for the Court case.

5. The Resolution passed requires that Viraf let the Board know in advance which files he wants to peruse so that Viraf can be shown the file after the pages are numbered and a record is available to show that the file was given to him. The Resolution simply provides for recorded access to files purely with the intention to protect the Trust’s records.

6. Where Minutes of the meeting are concerned, the Trustees have decided to follow standard procedure adopted in most big and small trusts – which is to read and confirm the minutes of the previous meeting at the Board Meeting and then record the same in the official Minutes Book. Any trustee, including Viraf Mehta, wishing to refer to the minutes may do so, but, once again, by following due process and procedure. If a trustee requires a relevant extract of the Minutes, he/she may do so with a request in writing stating reasons. This rule applies to every single trustee and not just Viraf Mehta.

The Board is only exercising good governance by putting in place a secure system and process. In so doing, we are protecting vital and sensitive data and information from getting compromised.

We are all for transparency and full accountability and we stand by the assurance we had given to the electorate. However, when we have certain trustees who owe their loyalty to their family and friends, rather than the trust, it becomes necessary for us to safeguard what may become susceptible to misuse and manipulation.

By BPP Chairman Yazdi Desai and
Trustees Noshir Dadrawala and Kersi Randeria