Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Support our Journalism

9th Anniversary: Free Tote & Mug

The twin crises exposing Tata Group’s structural anomalies

A unanimous resolution passed by the two core bodies of Tata Trusts, SRTT and SDTT, losing unanimity at the biggest decision-making body of the group, Tata Sons board, signals an organisational weakness.

Is the Tata Group a family-owned business or a professionally managed entity? Is Tata Trusts, which is the largest shareholder with a 66 per cent stake in Tata Sons — the holding company of the salt-to-software conglomerate — a promoter in the traditional sense? How important is the Tata name when it comes to the top leadership in the group? Can a charitable organisation, such as Tata Trusts, steer and control a diverse group with some 26 listed entities that alone are valued at around $320 billion? Is there any single individual or a group of individuals representing the Tata Group as its owner? Should the structure of the Tata Group change to address some of the anomalies prompting the above questions?

Over the last 20 days or so, these questions have surfaced repeatedly in one context or another. Two developments, within a week of each other in August, triggered them.

Chandrasekaran’s decision and the question of continuity

The first event was on August 12, when N Chandrasekaran (popularly called Chandra) announced he would not offer himself for reappointment as Tata Sons chairman once his second term ends in February 2027.

The reason behind the surprise move was stated in Chandra’s letter to the Tata Sons board of directors as well as in the subsequent statement issued by the company: One member at the Tata Sons board meeting on February 24, 2026, did not support a Resolution that was unanimously passed by Tata Trusts last year.

The Resolution, which was recorded and recommended by the Tata Sons Nomination and Remuneration Committee, was to renew Chandra’s term as executive chairman for another five years.

An unprecedented adjournment

The second development that brought many of the questions mentioned above into focus was the August 18 adjournment of the Tata........

© ThePrint