For perhaps the first time in its 78-year history the CSI will not be having its General Synod at its constitutionally- appointed time a week from now. The notice calling the triennial meeting has not been issued by General Secretary Fernandas Rathinaraja. This means that the church cannot elect a new leadership, as mandated in its constitution, to continue the business of running its operations seamlessly – something that has been the practice for nearly eight decades.

When the three-year term of the current Synod runs out a week from now, the CSI will be plunged into an unprecedented constitutional crisis. Any decisions current Synod officers – moderator, deputy moderator, general secretary and treasurer — may make after mid-January will be illegal. The ad-interim bodies of the existing Synod i.e. the Synod Executive and the Synod Working Committee will lose their legal mandate to function.

With legal incapacitation of the Synod will go the power to appoint new bishops, administrative committees to manage dioceses and constitute various other boards, departments and committees. Even the Executive’s power to decide when the next Synod is to be held will cease to exist due to the unprecedented constitutional vacuum created. The greed of the current officers to cling on to power at any cost will cost the church dearly.

Scary as this emerging situation is, the implications of a constitutional breakdown in the CSI is even more severe for the CSITA and, by extension, for the dioceses. As readers know the finances and properties of the church — administered by the Synod and the dioceses through some 6700 units (churches, hospitals, schools, colleges, technical institutes, etc) across five states — are held by the CSITA. As per Article 5 of the Articles of Association of the CSITA, one third of its members retire at every General Synod with vacancies to be filled during the meeting. That will not be happening now as it should due to failure to uphold the CSI Constitution.

Worse, since the Synod officers function, questionably, as ex-officio (unelected) officers of the CSITA (Moderator of CSI being Chairman of CSITA, Deputy Moderator being Deputy Chairman, General Secretary being Hon. Secretary and Hon. Treasurer being Hon. Treasurer) the CSITA risks being rendered headless. The functioning of one of India’s largest non-profit companies that holds lakhs of crores of rupees worth of properties and has annual revenues of Rs 3000 crore will get paralysed without new Synod-CSITA officers.

Every diocese, and the units being managed by it on behalf of the CSITA, technically operates its finances based on a power of attorney jointly given by the CSITA secretary and treasurer that is usually valid for the term of the diocesan council. It is learnt that many dioceses currently function with expired powers of attorney. This situation exists because banks, given the volume of business dioceses and their units provide, are reluctant to demand updated PoAs. Many simply accept letters requesting change of bank signatories for an account (as usually happens after new officials take charge) without insisting on the latest valid PoA from CSITA to legally back it.

Some banks even demand court orders for freezing of existing accounts (see example attached) to avoid having to address the issue of an invalid PoA. This although strict adherence to KYC norms is a RBI-mandated duty of banks that does not require any judicial decree.

In the absence of a legitimate secretary and treasurer for CSITA who can issue valid PoAs, the continued operations of many dioceses will become tricky. And not just financially. Even prosecuting cases relating to CSITA properties by dioceses cannot happen without a valid PoA. Similarly many other commercial transactions like renewal of property leases, registration of new properties, etc become difficult with it.

It is important to remember that unlike CSI, which is an unregistered association of persons, the CSITA is a registered Section 8 company under the Companies Act 2013 and thus is subject to stricter regulation. In November 2016 the National Company Law Tribunal had in an interim order appointed a retired Madras High Court judge to administer the CSITA and removed its entire board and managing committee. But that order was not operationailsed, partly because the judge appointed died before he could take office and partly because the CSITA used questionable tactics to get the order reversed by the same tribunal.

Since then a three-judge bench of the Madras High Court, in a Feb 2024 ruling, brought the non-religious activities of the CSITA (i.e. excluding churches) within writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. In July 2024 the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by CSITA treasurer Vimal Sukumar challenging the high court order, which stemmed from a case filed by former CSITA director Bright Joseph.

But while stating the apex court was “not inclined to interfere with the impunged order passed by the High Court,” a two judge bench — the same two judges who later heard the CSI constitutional amendments case — ruled that the “question of law involved is kept open.” (see attached). That loophole has now been used by General Secretary Fernandas Rathinaraja to move a fresh SLP, filed on 23/12/2025 (see SC diary record attached), in the Supreme Court. This to try and set aside the Bright Joseph judgement. Is this what Rathinaraja had in mind when he misled the Synod Executive on Dec 11 saying he was waiting for a clarification from the apex court?

Legal experts say It will take at least two-three months before the Supreme Court will hear Rathinaraja’s petition and decide on the all-important interim stay he will no doubt be seeking. Meanwhile it is likely that a plea will be filed in the Madras High Court soon seeking appointment of an administrator for the CSITA.

Only around 20% of CSITA’s annual income, as per its audited financials, currently comes from churches. This together with the fact that there are lakhs of non-Christians who avail the educational and medical services offered by CSITA institutions makes a compelling case for the public interest nature of its operations. Hence the possibility is high the Madras High Court will entertain any writ petition filed on the crisis in managing CSITA’s operations triggered by failure to hold the General Synod.

It is also understood that some of the petitioners in at least two pending CSI-related cases before the Madras High Court (C.S. No 86/2022 and C.S. No 7/2023) are preparing to move interlocutory applications. This to press for appointment of an administrator(s) for running the CSI Synod and CSITA post mid-January. Watch this space.