Allowed

Pravin Shamrao Patil and Ors. v. Joint Charity Commissioner Kolhapur Division and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Dec 2023WP/15481/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging refusal to implead petitioners in ongoing Charity Commissioner proceedings. Court held petitioners are necessary parties and quashed the rejection order allowing impleadment within one week.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order rejecting application to implead petitioners quashed; application allowed; petitioners to be impleaded within one week.

Pravin Shamrao Patil and Ors. Vs Joint Charity… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-AS:39153

¶2

4-wp-15481-2023.doc
Sonali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.15481 OF 2023

¶5

Pravin Shamrao Patil & Ors....Petitioners
 Versus
Joint Charity Commissioner,
Kolhapur Division & Ors....Respondents

¶6

Mr. Akhil Kupade i/b. Mr. Prashant Bhavake, for the Petitioners.

¶7

Mrs. V. S. Nimbalkar, AGP for the State/Respondent No.1.

¶8

Mr. Sukand Kulkarni, for Respondent No.3 (through Video Conferencing).

¶9

Mr. Sachin Thorat, for Respondent Nos.4 to 12.

¶10

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 22^nd DECEMBER 2023

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.Heard Mr. Kupade, learned Counsel appearing for the
Petitioners, Mrs. Nimbalkar, learned AGP appearing for the
State/Respondent No.1, Mr. Kulkarni, learned Counsel appearing for
Respondent No.3 and Mr. Thorat, learned Counsel appearing for
Respondent Nos.4 to 12.

¶13

2. Mr. Kupade, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners

¶14

1/4

¶15

4-wp-15481-2023.doc
Sonali

¶16

states that all the Respondents are served.

¶17

3.The Petitioners are challenging the order dated 2nd August
2023 passed by the Respondent No.1-learned Joint Charity
Commissioner, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur by which, Application
dated 1st August 2023 filed below Exhibit-106 by the Petitioners
under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act (“hereinafter
referred to as the “said Act”) read with Order I Rule 10 of the Code of
Civil Procedure to add the Petitioners as party to the said proceedings
initiated under Section 41(D) of the said Act has been rejected.
Perusal of the impugned Order shows that the Application seeking
their impleadment as party to the said proceeding under Section
41(D) is rejected and it is directed that they can be called as
witnesses.

¶18

4.The record of the case shows that only Respondent No.3 has
filed objection to the said Application. Mr. Sukand Kulkarni, learned
Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.3 on instructions states
that the Respondent No.3 is withdrawing the said objection. He
further states that the Respondent No.3 has no objection to implead
the Petitioners as parties to the said proceedings.

¶19

5. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.4 to 12 on

¶20

2/4

¶21

4-wp-15481-2023.doc
Sonali

¶22

instructions submitted that, if the Court extends the time limit
granted by earlier order to complete the proceedings then, they have
no objection to implead the Petitioners as party Respondents.

¶23

6.The Petitioners filed the complaint with the learned Joint
Charity Commissioner on 9th August 2021 regarding functioning of
the trust and thereafter, it is admitted position that the action under
Section 41(D) has been initiated on the said complaint. It is settled
legal position that a necessary party is one without whom no order
can be effectively made and a proper party is one whose presence is
necessary for a complete and final decision of question involved in
the proceedings. As the proceedings under Section 41(D) of the said
Act are initiated pursuant to the complaint of the Petitioners, it is
clear that the Petitioners are either the necessary parties or at least
the proper parties.

¶24

7. The Respondent No.1-learned Joint Charity Commissioner has filed detailed affidavit. However, the issues raised in the said affidavit are not concerning whether the Petitioners are necessary or proper parties.

¶25

8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 2^nd August 2023 passed by the Respondent No.1-learned Joint Charity Commissioner is

¶26

3/4

¶27

4-wp-15481-2023.doc
Sonali

¶28

quashed and set aside. The said Application filed below Exhibit-106 is
allowed. The Petitioners are directed to be impleaded as parties to
the said proceedings filed under Section 41(D) of the said Act. The
same be done within a period of one week from today. The Petitioners
to file their say on or before 5th January 2024.

¶29

9.In view of this order, time granted by order dated 25th
September 2023 passed in Writ Petition No.8451 of 2023 with
connected Writ Petitions to dispose of Application No.1 of 2022 filed
under Section 41(D) of the said Act is extended till 30th April 2024.

¶30

10.The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms with no order as
to costs.

¶31

11.All the parties to co-operate with the Respondent No.1-learned
Joint Charity Commissioner for disposal of the said proceedings in
time bound manner and parties shall not take unnecessary
adjournments.

¶32

 [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶33

4/4

Pravin Shamrao Patil and Ors. v. Joint Charity Commissioner Kolhapur Division and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravin Shamrao Patil and Ors. v. Joint Charity Commissioner Kolhapur Division and Ors.

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

Khan Amina Khatun (Jai Ambe Hardware) Decd. Thr Khan Farhan Ahmed Ajaz Ahmed Vs Apex Grievances Redressal Committee and Ors.

Paschim Maharashtra Education Trust and Anr. Vs Tabassum Anwar Shaikh and Ors.

Paschim Maharashtra Education Trust and Anr. Vs Tabassum Anwar Shaikh and Ors.

Smt. Ashalata Prabodh Kolhatkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Baburao Bhimsha Birajdar Vs State of Maharashtra

Suresh Thau Rathod Vs the Collector and District Magistrate Solapur and Anr.