Partly allowed

Rushiji S/O Sambaji Raut and Another v. Vijay S/O Syhriram Bagmare and Another

Bombay HC6 Aug 2024WP/1056/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recorded trustees sought production of trust records under Section 41-A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act; the Assistant Charity Commissioner instead directed audit reports and issued a prosecution show cause notice. The Court quashed the impugned order, restored the application, and directed its decision before any further action.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 06-12-2017 quashed and set aside; Section 41-A application restored to the Assistant Charity Commissioner for decision on 26-08-2024.

Rushiji S/O Sambaji Raut and Another Vs Vijay S/O… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:8554-DB

¶2

1 wp1056.18

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1056 OF 2018

¶5

( Rushiji s/o Sambaji Raut and another ..vs.. Vijay s/o Syhriram Bagmare and another )

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

- - - - Ms. Rashmi Gurnule, Counsel h/f. Ms. Kirti Satpute, Counsel for the petitioners,

¶10

Mr. J.Y. Ghurde, AGP for respondent No.2.

¶11

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, J J . DATED : 06-08-2024

¶12

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶13

It appears that the petitioners, who are the recorded trustees, preferred an application under Section 41-A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (for short, “the Act”) for issuance of direction to respondent No.1 who was recorded Secretary in earlier regime to produce original record of the Trust.

¶14

Instead of deciding the said application in the light of prayer made therein, the Assistant Charity Commissioner has passed the impugned order thereby directing the registered trustees to submit audit reports and also issued show cause notice for prosecution.

¶15

It appears that we have no doubt that the Assistant Charity Commissioner in the given case is very much armed with the powers to issue show cause notice

¶16

2 wp1056.18

¶17

under Section 67 of the Act as has been observed in the impugned order, however, what is required to be noticed is the respondent-Assistant Charity Commissioner should have adjudicated the cause which was brought before it by the petitioners before issuing the directions to submit the audited accounts and also the show cause notice for prosecution.

¶18

In that view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 06-12-2017 passed by respondent No.2. The application under Section 41-A of the Act once stood restored to the file of respondent No.2, before whom the petitioners are directed to appear on 26-8-2024, it is directed to decide the said application of the petitioners and thereafter if so required, may take recourse to the provisions of Section 67 of the Act or for issuance of directions to the recorded trustees to submit the audite reports.

¶19

6. The petition stands partly allowed.

¶20

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶21

adgokar

Rushiji S/O Sambaji Raut and Another v. Vijay S/O Syhriram Bagmare and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rushiji S/O Sambaji Raut and Another v. Vijay S/O Syhriram Bagmare and Another

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

Shama Sarvjanik Sanstha, Kalamb, Dorli, Yavatmal Thr. President and Others Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Education and Sport Department, Mumbai and Another

Namdeo Jayaram Sasane Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Nagar Vikas Vibhag, Mumbai and Another

Nitin S/O Umakant Gondane Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Agriculture, Animal Hus., Dairy Dev. and Fishery Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Sachin S/O Madhavrao Ladke Vs Ravindra Katolkar, the Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Nagpur and Ors.

Pravin Rajesh Dhanvijay Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of School Education, Mumbai and 4 Other

Rajkumar S/O Murlidhar Shende Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Secretary, Secondary Education Dept., Mumbai and Ors.