When the country’s oldest and most respected business house finds itself in the middle of a power struggle, it ceases to be a corporate issue — it becomes a national one. The Tata Group, a 156-year-old conglomerate synonymous with India’s industrial rise and ethical capitalism, is not just a private enterprise. It is a national institution that has shaped everything from our steel and power to aviation, automobiles, software, and philanthropy.
That is why the Modi government’s decision to step in and calm the turbulence within Tata Sons is not interference but an act of national responsibility. A government that has prided itself on “drift-free governance” for more than a decade could hardly afford to watch from the sidelines while an empire that employs lakhs, drives innovation, and symbolizes India’s industrial credibility teetered on internal discord.
The crisis has its roots in Tata Trusts, which holds nearly 66 per cent of Tata Sons, the holding company for over 400 Tata entities, including 30 listed firms such as Tata Steel, Tata Motors, TCS, Titan, and Tata Power.
After Ratan Tata’s passing in October 2024, the reins passed to Noel Tata, but unity within the Trusts fractured soon after. Two camps emerged — one led by Noel Tata and Vice-Chairman Venu Srinivasan, who sought to preserve continuity and the Tata ethos, and the other led by trustee Mehli Mistry, backed by Pramit Jhaveri, Jehangir HC Jehangir, and Darius Khambata, demanding more say in governance and alleging exclusion from decision-making.
The rift widened during the September 11, 2025, meeting to reappoint Vijay Singh, a respected former Defence Secretary, to the Tata Sons board. The Mistry faction opposed the proposal, and their subsequent attempt to nominate Mehli Mistry was blocked by the Noel camp citing conflict of interest, given his links to the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, which owns 18.37 per cent of Tata Sons. Singh’s resignation soon after symbolized how deep the divisions had become.
Compounding the governance turmoil are regulatory pressures. The Reserve Bank of India has insisted that Tata Sons comply with listing norms applicable to large non-banking financial holding companies. That means opening up to greater transparency and accountability — something the Trusts have long resisted.
All this comes as the Tata Group spearheads India’s ambitions in semiconductors, EVs, and global aviation through Air India and Vistara. Prolonged instability at the top could have jeopardized investor confidence, regulatory compliance, and even national economic credibility.
When TCS, the group’s crown jewel, abruptly canceled its quarterly press meet last week — citing Ratan Tata’s death anniversary — speculation grew that the leadership crisis was taking its toll.
Sensing the gravity, Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman recently met Noel Tata, N. Chandrasekaran, Venu Srinivasan, and Darius Khambata to restore calm and consensus. It was an extraordinary move — but entirely warranted.
For a government that has built its reputation on decisive leadership, this was consistent with its approach: prevent drift, enforce accountability, and protect national assets. The same firmness that guided economic reforms, PSU consolidation, and banking clean-up is now being applied to ensure that no individual or faction can hijack a corporate legacy that belongs as much to India as to its shareholders.
Few groups have contributed as much to India’s industrial and social fabric as the Tatas:
- Tata Steel built the nation’s manufacturing backbone.
- Tata Power electrified cities before Independence.
- TCS placed India on the world IT map.
- Tata Motors made indigenous automobiles a reality.
- Tata philanthropy founded the IISc, TIFR, and countless hospitals and educational institutions.
This isn’t just a business house — it is a legacy of nation-building. And a government committed to Atmanirbhar Bharat cannot allow that legacy to fragment over personal ego or boardroom intrigue.
Well, irresponsible political adversaries of Modi may call it state interference. But in my view, the Modi government’s record tells a different story — it has consistently acted as a stabilizer, not a controller. Whether in banking reforms, PSU mergers, or corporate governance, the objective has never been to meddle, but to safeguard the integrity of enterprises vital to India’s economic sovereignty.
As a matter of fact, the Tata Group contributes enormously to the national exchequer. Tata Motors alone paid ₹38,892 crore in total global taxes and other contributions in FY25, marking only a marginal dip from ₹39,344 crore in FY24, according to its inaugural Tax Transparency Report 2024–25. The report also notes a steady 9% tax-to-revenue ratio for both years — a sign of consistency and compliance that few corporations can match.
India’s economy and the Tata Group’s progress have long moved in tandem. Over the past 34 years, Tata’s net worth and India’s GDP have mirrored each other’s upward trajectory. No other brand has embedded itself so deeply in the Indian psyche. What distinguishes Tata is not merely its business success but its moral compass — a rare alignment of enterprise and empathy, profitability and purpose.
Though no direct comparison is publicly available, a broad estimate tells the story. With India’s GDP projected by the IMF at $4.19 trillion in 2025, the Tata Group’s combined net worth roughly equals 10.4% of the national GDP — a staggering figure that underlines its centrality to India’s economic ecosystem.
Going forward, a time-bound mediation process, stricter conflict-of-interest norms, and a transparent roadmap for Tata Sons’ eventual public listing could ensure stability and accountability.
Ultimately, this episode is a test of India’s corporate maturity and the government’s resolve to prevent chaos. By stepping in firmly yet fairly, the Modi government has sent an unmistakable signal — India will not allow its most trusted institutions to drift.
In saving the Tatas from internal collapse, it is also safeguarding something far greater — the spirit of Indian enterprise itself.
