Disposed

Sunny Panditrao Misal and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC21 Jan 2020WP/445/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought appointment of an administrator for a trust alleging mismanagement and lack of elections. The court directed the Assistant Charity Commissioner to decide the pending scheme expeditiously within four months, noting elections cannot be conducted absent scheme provisions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Ahmednagar to decide the pending scheme under Enquiry No. 25 of 2014 expeditiously within four months. No costs awarded.

Sunny Panditrao Misal and Another Vs the State of… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

1 wp 445.19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 445 OF 2019

¶4

Sunny Panditrao Missal and another .. Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶7

Shri Shrikishan S. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri V. M. Kagane, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Shri V. S. Bedre, Advocate for Intervenors.

¶8

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 21ST JANUARY, 2020.

¶9

FINAL ORDER :

¶10

. Heard Mr. Shinde, the learned advocate for petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Bedre, the learned advocate for the intervenors.

¶11

Mr. Shinde, the learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 be directed to appoint an administrator to take over the charge of the Ahmednagar Pahili Mandali (Congregation) of the trust bearing PTR No. B-18. The learned advocate further submits that, though the Assistant Charity Commissioner has directed to hold the elections, the elections are not held of the trust. According to the learned advocate, two churches though are shown as property of another trust, they are actually being administered by the trust in

¶12

2 wp 445.19

¶13

question. According to the learned counsel, the trust is being mismanaged, as such, administrator needs to be appointed.

¶14

On the last date, we had asked about the elections to be conducted and why elections are not conducted inspite of the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner and this Court.

¶15

Mr. Kagane, the learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions submits that, there are two trusts and as far as present trust is concerned, the present trust has cemetery and two churches are not property of the present trust. The old scheme does not contemplate conduct of election, nor methodology of conducting the election is specified in the scheme. The new scheme is of the year 2014 and the same is pending adjudication at the hands of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Ahmednagar in Enquiry No. 25 of 2014.

¶16

Mr. Bedre, the learned advocate for the intervenors submits that, as far as trust in question is concerned, the churches are not property of the trust in question. The petitioners are mixing the issues and the properties.

¶17

It appears that, under the scheme as existing the provision for election is not made for electing the trustees of the trust in by-laws, nor the scheme provides for nomination of the persons.

¶18

If the petitioners have any grievance with regard to the persons holding the post of the trust in question, then the petitioners have remedy U/Sec. 41-A, 41-E and other provisions

¶19

3 wp 445.19

¶20

of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act. They may resort to the same.

¶21

The elections cannot be conducted in absence of the provisions in the scheme for conducting the election.

¶22

The scheme is pending consideration with the office of the A. C. C. Ahmednagar in the proceeding bearing Enquiry No. 25 of 2014. It would be appropriate to direct the A. C. C. to decide the said scheme submitted bearing Enquiry No. 25 of 2014 expeditiously so as to put an end to the anomalous situation.

¶23

In view of the above, we direct the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Ahmednagar to decide the scheme as pending before it bearing Enquiry No. 25 of 2014 expeditiously and preferably within a period of four (04) months from today. The parties shall co-operate in expeditious disposal of the said Enquiry No. 25 of 2014.

¶24

If the decision is taken upon the scheme, the further steps shall be undertaken immediately. With these observations and directions the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶25

[SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

¶26

bsb/Jan. 20

Sunny Panditrao Misal and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunny Panditrao Misal and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhanudas Bhagwanta Putwad and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhausaheb Rambhau Nagare and Another Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Others

Mahavir Marotrao Bhumkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vilas Dadarao Kendhale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajendra Vasantrao Marale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bapusaheb Vishwanath Patare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another