Ratan Tata’s public silence on Mistry’s death is unfair

Therefore, his studied silence on the untimely demise of former colleague Cyrus Mistry comes as a surprise to longtime observers of the Tata group. It seems unnatural for a person like Ratan Tata not to publicly acknowledge this tragic turn of events.

It is quite possible that Ratan Tata being a very private person has expressed his condolences to the Mistry family in private. After all, apart from the intergenerational ties between the two families, Ratan Tata and Cyrus Mistry have also worked closely together for many years, ever since Cyrus Mistry was appointed a director on the Tata Sons board in 2006, up from 18.5 of his family. As a representative of more. % stake in the holding company. Therefore, it is quite likely that Ratan Tata may have expressed his admiration through private channels.

You might also like

Tata Sons plans to raise $4 billion for Air India

What statistics tell us about India’s deadly roads

Who is running NSE Option? Students, Housewives, Technicians, Small Businessmen

Order book a plus, but HAL should get the execution right

However, despite the personal nature of grief and condolence in the matter, the lack of public statement seems unusual, given Ratan Tata’s position as chairman emeritus of Tata Sons, chairman of Tata Trusts and principal representative of Tata House. N Chandrasekaran, the current chairman of Tata Sons, issued a statement expressing his grief and sorrow at the news of his untimely demise. But, it’s still not the same thing.

There is an additional reason why Ratan Tata lacks a public statement: a recent history of litigation and rancor that has come to define the relationship between the two personalities. It is true that the fallout has been acrimonious and it has soured the relationship between the two families. Since the public expulsion of Cyrus Mistry from the board of Tata Sons, the two sides have faced each other in the National Company Law Tribunal, its appellate bodies, high courts and the Supreme Court. This has affected the relationship.

Ratan Tata is not new to such internal squabbles. His naming as chairman of Tata Sons in the early 1990s was accompanied by court cases by several ruling satraps of the group; Ratan Tata’s behavior during various legal battles was notable for his decency. And, therefore, given the nature of the present tragedy and a premature snuff from a brighter light, Ratan Tata could overcome all past differences, displaying an extraordinary sense of propriety that has marked his entire corporate career and high moral captured the right. field.

Which is why it all seems a bit unfair, given Ratan Tata’s stature as a politician for India Inc and his past record of public etiquette. A public statement would have set an example, had it provided a template for the rest of corporate India. Ratan Tata during his tenure at the Tata Group has set an example for many budding Indian entrepreneurs on how to align corporate life with values ​​and ethics. This is why a public statement mourning the death of Cyrus Mistry may have provided him with an additional lesson on the dignity and decency that Ratan Tata embodies in real life. Purposeful silence is contrary to the corporate culture of the Tata Group – of diverting profits to various charities, as consummate corporate citizens of India Inc – and leaves the younger generation with a flawed paradigm.

Elsewhere in Minto

In opinion, Ajit Ranade profiles Cyrus Mistry, leaders away from limelight, Amish Mehta’s argument Decarbonizing Traditional Smokestacks There will be no cakewalk. Vidya Mahambare and Praveen Kumar write about an important piece Hidden information in price data, The Long Story Tells How Indigo Will Protect Itself number 1 post,

post your comment
first article