|Headquarters||Bombay House, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India|
|Revenue||US$100.4 billion (2017)|
|Total assets||US$126 billion (2017)|
Number of employees
|Subsidiaries||List of subsidiaries|
Tata Group (//) is an Indian multinational conglomerate holding company headquartered in Mumbai, Maharashtra. Founded in 1868 by Jamshedji Tata, the company gained international recognition after purchasing several global companies, beginning with Tetley in 2000, recorded as "the biggest acquisition in Indian corporate history." One of India's largest conglomerates, Tata Group is owned by Tata Sons, a registered charity.
Each Tata company operates independently under the guidance and supervision of its own board of directors and shareholders. There are 29 publicly listed Tata enterprises with a combined market capitalisation of about $151.62 billion as of March 1, 2018. Significant Tata companies and subsidiaries include Tata Steel, Tata Motors, Jaguar Land Rover with its marques Jaguar and Land Rover, Tata Consultancy Services, Tata Power, Tata Chemicals (including Tata Swach), Tata Global Beverages (including Tata Coffee), Tata Teleservices, Titan, Tata Communications, and The Indian Hotels Company Limited (Taj Hotels).
The Chairman of Tata Sons is usually the Chairman of the Tata Group.
This section lists the Tata companies and details their business:
Information systems and communications
Tata Group has helped establish and finance numerous research, educational and cultural institutes in India, and received the Carnegie Medal of Philanthropy. Some of the institutes established by the Tata Group are:
In 2010, Tata Group donated ₹ 2.20 billion ($50 million) to the Harvard Business School (HBS) to build an academic and a residential building for executive education programmes on the institute's campus in Boston, Massachusetts, now Tata Hall, which is the largest endowment received by HBS from an international donor.
The Tata Group has also attracted some controversy during its more than 150 years in operation, notably:
The Kerala Government filed an affidavit in the high court alleging that Tata Tea had "grabbed" forest land of 3,000 acres (12 km2) at Munnar. The Tatas provided that they possessed 58,741.82 acres (237.7197 km2) of land, which they are allowed to retain under the Kannan Devan Hill (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971, and there was a shortage of 278.23 hectares in that. The Chief Minister of Kerala V.S. Achuthanandan, who vowed to evict all on government land in Munnar, formed a special squad for the Munnar land takeover mission and started acquiring back properties. However, the mission was aborted due to both influential land-holders and opposition from Achuthanandan's own party.
On 2 January 2006, Kalinganagar, Odisha villagers protested the construction of a compound wall on land historically owned by them, for a Tata steel plant. Police opened fire at a crowd after a policeman was gruesomely killed by the mob.
Tata Motors reported that deals to supply hardware and automobiles to Burma's military junta had come in for criticism from human rights and democracy activists. In December 2006, Gen. Thura Shwe Mann, Myanmar's chief of general staff visited the Tata Motors plant in Pune. In 2009, TATA Motors announced that it would press ahead with plans to manufacture trucks in Myanmar.
The Singur controversy in West Bengal was a series of protests by locals and political parties over the forced acquisition, eviction, and inadequate compensation to those farmers displaced for the Tata Nano plant, during which Mamata Banerjee's party was widely criticised as acting for political gain. Despite the support of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) state government, Tata eventually pulled the project out of West Bengal, citing safety concerns. Narendra Modi, then Chief Minister of Gujarat, made land available for the Nano project.
On Aug 31, 2016, in a historic judgement, the Honorable Supreme Court of India set aside the land acquisition by the West Bengal Government in 2006 that had facilitated Tata Motors' Nano plant, stating that the West Bengal government had not taken possession of the land legally, and were now required to repossess and return it to local farmers within 12 weeks.
On the environmental front, the Port of Dhamara controversy has received significant coverage, both within India and in Tata's emerging global markets. The Dhamra port, a venture between Tata Steel and Larsen & Toubro, has been criticised by Indian and international organisations due to its proximity to the Gahirmatha Sanctuary and Bhitarkanika National Park. Gahirmatha Beach is one of the world's largest mass nesting sites for the Olive Ridley Turtle, and India's second largest mangrove forest, Bhitarkanika, is a designated Ramsar site. TATA officials state that the port poses an ecological threat, and that mitigation measures are being employed with the advice of the IUCN, while conservation organisations, including Greenpeace, assert that no proper environmental impact analysis has been done for the project, which has undergone changes in size and specifications since it was first proposed; critics claimed that the port could disrupt mass nesting at Gahirmtha beaches as well as the ecology of the Bitharkanika mangrove forest.
In 2007, Tata Group joined forces with a Tanzanian company to build a soda ash extraction plant in Tanzania. Environmental activists oppose the plant because it would be near Lake Natron, and it has a very high chance of affecting the lake's ecosystem and its neighbouring dwellers, jeopardising endangered Lesser Flamingo birds. Lake Natron is where two-thirds of Lesser Flamingos reproduce. Producing soda ash involves drawing out salt water from the lake, and then disposing the water back to the lake. This process could interrupt the chemical makeup of the lake. 22 African nations signed a petition to stop its construction.
In April 2016, a U.S. Federal Grand Jury awarded Epic Systems a $940 million judgement against Tata Consultancy Services and Tata America International Corp. Filed 31 October 2014; the suit charged that "6,477 unauthorized downloads could be used to enhance Tata's competing product, Med Mantra." In 2017, U.S. District Court Judge William Conley reduced the Award to $420 million; the company states that the judgement is also being appealed, as "not supported by evidence presented during the trial and a strong appeal can be made to superior court to fully set aside the jury verdict.”
In July 2018, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which "adjudicates issues relating to Indian companies," issued a verdict in the company's favor on charges of mismanagement leveled in 2016 by ousted chairman, Cyrus Mistry.
According to the 40-page complaint, Tata employees fraudulently accessed Epic documents and downloaded at least 6,477 of them, containing information that could be used to benefit Tata’s own health care software, Med Mantra.
[T]he documents downloaded by TCS personnel included, among other things, documents detailing over twenty years of development of Epic’s proprietary software and database systems, including programming rules and processes developed to produce optimal functionality of Epic’s software; documents that decode the operation of its source code that would otherwise be unusable to those outside of Epic; and information regarding Epic’s system capabilities and functions, including procedures for transferring data between customer environments, rules related to information collection, methods for limiting access to patient records, and processes for converting customer data, all of which reveal decades of work with its customers to determine the functionality desirable or required for Epic to provide successful products to those customers.
None of the audio/visual content is hosted on this site. All media is embedded from other sites such as GoogleVideo, Wikipedia, YouTube etc. Therefore, this site has no control over the copyright issues of the streaming media.
All issues concerning copyright violations should be aimed at the sites hosting the material. This site does not host any of the streaming media and the owner has not uploaded any of the material to the video hosting servers. Anyone can find the same content on Google Video or YouTube by themselves.
The owner of this site cannot know which documentaries are in public domain, which has been uploaded to e.g. YouTube by the owner and which has been uploaded without permission. The copyright owner must contact the source if he wants his material off the Internet completely.