Petitioner challenged order allowing appeal against consent order approving change report. Appellate court found Deputy Charity Commissioner failed to decide legality of election. Single Judge refused to entertain petition due to findings of impropriety by appellate authority.
Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:BHC-NAG:8126
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.253/2024
Sudhir s/o Narayanrao Shende
...Versus…
Shri Devidas s/o Laxmanrao Shirbhate
Mr. S.N. Tapadia, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. Anand Parchure, Advocate a/w Mr. Nikhil Valesha, Advocate for respondent
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 19/07/2024
“2. The record reflects that the tenure of the executive body said to be elected by way of present change report is already over and the change report has become academic. Although the change report is seriously objected by the objector/s parties conceded that the change report be disposed off and the names of the de-facto trustees i.e. names reflected in the present change report be recorded on the Schedule-I with a view that the liability shall be of the person/body actually
2
functioned duly the said tenure. Since the change report has become academic and is hereby filed, rejected and disposed off. It is to be noted here that as per the contention of Adv. Pathak concerned body took charge from the administrator of this office on 05.04.2016. However, the directions are hereby issued for recording the de-facto trustee of the present change report on the Schedule I of the trust, for the period they actually functioned in the trust. No order as to costs.”
“13. It is significant to note that as per section 22 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 the authority is under obligation to decide the legality and validity of the change report. The learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has completely overlooked the purport of section 22 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has not recorded any finding about the election held on 21/10/2012. The authority is under obligation to decide that whether the election of the trust has been held amongst the valid members of the trust? Whether the election has been held as per the constitution of the trust? The present appellant and other objectors have filed the written objection on record but learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has completely overlooked the said written objection. The learned Deputy Charity
3
Commissioner has recorded finding that the tenure of the executive committee has expired. Hence the change report has become academic. The impugned judgment and order is cryptic. The impugned judgment and order is not based on proper and correct appreciation of evidence on record. It is seen that administrator has been appointed to look into the administration of the trust. The documents relied upon by the reporting trustee has not been proved. Notices have not been issued to the affected parties. It is very strange and surprising that the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has directed that the names of newly elected trustees be recorded in schedule I instead of deciding the change report on merits. Hence this matter requires to be remanded back to the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner to decide the legality and validity of the change report. The impugned judgment and order is not legal, proper and correct. Hence, I answer point No.1 in the negative. Hence interference by this authority is called for. Hence, I answer point No.2 in the affirmative.”
(N.R. BORKAR, J.)
Wadkar
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Charity Commissioner ought to have interfered with the consent order passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the findings recorded by the Joint Charity Commissioner allowing the appeal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sudhir s/o Narayanrao Shende
Shri Devidas s/o Laxmanrao Shirbhate
N.R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
