Tata Trusts Chairman Noel Tata has called attention to the validity of N Chandrasekaran’s reappointment as the executive chairman of Tata Sons and questioned the process of the Tata Trusts’ board.
In the eight-page letter dated 26th October signed by Noel and addressed to the company’s Company Secretary-Suprakash Mukhopadhyay, there’s a copy sent to the Board of Directors, citing it as a “void” resolution taken in September 17.
He has asked for all the details and explanations to check if this was done in accordance with the procedures laid down in Tata Sons’ Articles of Association.
Seeks Board Records and Legal Opinions
Noel Tata wants the firm to be able to provide records of his board meetings, voting results, conflict-of-interest disclosures and legal opinions that led to the recommendation to reappoint him.
His question has led to doubts being cast on the board adopting proper procedures for approving Chandrasekaran to stay on as executive chairman.
The letter also asks to clarify the reasons for the decision and information given to the directors prior to its consideration.
Raises Questions Over Potential Conflicts
Noel Tata has also thrown questions at TVS Motor around its possible secret business ties with a firm associated with Chandrasekaran’s family.
He has voiced concerns that all of the potential conflicts of interest were disclosed in a timely manner to be considered by the board when it voted to reappoint him. Allegations contained in the letter continue to remain concerns and the information does not prove that any wrongdoing has taken place.
Governance Questions at Tata Sons
Board accountability, corporate governance are at the core of the dispute between Tata Sons, the Tata group’s holding company, and its counterparties.
The reason for requesting documents is so that Noel can understand how the reappointment was conducted, and whether the necessary corporate procedures were respected.
How the company responds to the letter and any disclosures may dictate how the matter proceeds. The information given did not include any details on the action taken by Tata Sons.