Moolchand Kocher (Jain) Vs the Registrar Public Trust

¶1

1 / 5

¶2

VIVEK RAWAT

¶3

Digitally signed by VIVEK RAWAT

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 4717 of 2021

¶7

Moolchand Kocher (Jain) S/o Late Bhanwarlal Ji Kocher Aged About 51 Years R/o Mahaveer Colony, Ward No. 20, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - The Registrar Public Trust Sub Divisional Officer (R), Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶10

2 - Shri Umendra Bafna, The Chief Election Officer, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶11

3 - Shri Rajesh Luniya S/o Late Shri Sohan Lal Ji Luniya Respondent No. 3 Are The Candidate, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶12

4 - Shri Ritesh Kumar Golchha S/o Shri Jawerilal Ji Golchha Respondent No. 4 Are The Candidate, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶13

5 - Shri Jitendra Kumar Baid S/o Late Shri Nemichand Ji Baid Respondent No. 5 Are The Candidate, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶14

6 - Shri Pradeep Jhabak S/o Lt. Shri Ganeshmal Ji Jhabak Respondent No. 6 Are The Candidate, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶15

7 - Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain S/o Late Shri Shantilal Ji Luniya Respondent No. 7 Are The Candidate, Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Mandir Trust, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner

¶18

:Shri Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate appears along with Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate

¶19

2 / 5

¶20

For State/Respondent No.1 :Shri Santosh Bharat, P.L. For Respondent No.2 Smt. Maya Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Ravindra Sharma, advocate. For Respondent No.3 to 7 Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate

¶21

Single Bench:Hon'ble Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. Judgment on Board

¶22

07.11.2024

¶23

By virtue of this petition, the petitioner is questioning the legality and propriety of the order dated 15.09.2021, passed by the Registrar, Public Trust/Sub-Divisional Officer, (Revenue) Mahasamund, whereby, the application (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Chhattisgarh Public Trust Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1951”) questioning the election process as was made by the Respondent No.2-Chief Election Officer, Mahasamund, has been rejected.

¶24

According to the petitioner, Respondent No.3 (Shri Rajesh Luniya) and Respondent No.7 (Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain) without submitting their resignations have contested the elections for the post of President and Trustee, respectively of the trust known as ी शांतीनाथ भगवान जैन मंदि�र ट्रस्ट महासमुन्� (छ०ग०) (hereinafter referred to as “the Mandir Trust”) which is a registered trust having its by-laws, therefore, their election as such, are illegal by virtue of clause 24 (7) of the said by-laws. As such, the application (Annexure P-2) was made by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Act, 1951 before the Registrar Public Trust/SubDivisional Officer (Revenue) by questioning the election process,

¶25

3 / 5

¶26

as made by the Chief Election Officer, but the application has been rejected holding the same to be not maintainable and being aggrieved, the instant petition has been filed.

¶27

Since, the application made by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Act, 1951 has been held to be not maintainable, therefore, it is necessary to examine the said provision, which provides as under:-

¶28

9. Change .--(1) Where any change occurs in any of the entries recorded in the register, the working trustee shall, within ninety days from the date of the occurrence of such change or where any change is desired in such entries in the interest of the administration of the such public trust, report in the prescribed manner such change or proposed change to the Registrar.

¶29

(2) If, on receipt of such report and after making such enquiry as the Registrar may consider necessary, the Registrar is satisfied that a change has occurred or is necessary in any of the entries recorded in the register in regard to a particular public trust, he shall record a finding with the reason therefor and subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (3) amend the entries in the said register in accordance with such finding.

¶30

(3) The provisions of Section 8 shall apply to any finding under this section as they apply to a finding under Section 6.

¶31

A bare perusal of the aforesaid provision would show that if any change occurs in any of the entries recorded in the register, then the working trustee shall, within ninety days of such change, report to the Registrar, in the prescribed manner and upon receiving of such information, the Registrar after making such inquiry as he may consider necessary, shall record a finding with

¶32

4 / 5

¶33

the reason therefor and subject to the provisions provided under sub-section (3), amend the entries in the said register in accordance with such finding.

¶34

It, thus, appears that the aforesaid provision infact talks about the change if occurred in any of the entries recorded in the register. Therefore, the Registrar Public Trust/Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mahasamund has not committed any illegality in holding the alleged application (Annexure P-2) to be not maintainable.

¶35

Besides, certain by-laws of the Mandir Trust are to be seen which read as under:-

¶36

23. - चनावसु ंबधीदनयमावलीःि

¶37

1.	xxxx xxxx xxxx
2.	xxxx xxxx xxxx
3.	xxxx xxxx xxxx
4.	xxxx xxxx xxxx
5.	चुनावयथासंभवसव!सम्मतितसेकरायाजावेगाअन्यथाकी
ቝኌस्थतितें्ቦ चुनावंंिेि्ቦ एवंसम््ि ंे	ኌ्िमेंही्ቦ ीसंघकीसाधारणसभामेंचुनावहेतुतीनस�स्यीय ुसंचालकमंडलकागठनदिकयाजायेगाजोदिक्ቦ ीसंघकेवरिर्቗ ं्मानीयव्यदि3 होंगे।

¶38

24. चनावआचारसु ंदहताःि

¶39

- ु ि

¶40

1. xxxx xxxx xxxx
2. xxxx xxxx xxxx
3. xxxx xxxx xxxx
4. xxxx xxxx xxxx
5. xxxx xxxx xxxx
6. चुनावसंचालकमंडलकेदिनण!यसेअसंतु्ቖ्ቚ त्याशी्ቛ ारादिववा� ि्ቦ ं्ेंुेु
कादिनपटारा्ቦ ीसंघकीसामान्यसभामेंबहुमतसेबनाईगईचुनाव अपीलसदिमतितकेमाध्यमसेदिकयाजावेगा।अपीलसदिमतितकेस�स्यों
कीअतिधकतमसंख्या5 पाँचहोगी।जिजनकादिनण!यसव!मान्यहोगाऔर
ऐसेदिनण!यकोउ3्ቚ त्याशी्ቛ ारादिकसीभीतरहकीचुनौतीनहीं�ीजा सकेगी।

¶41

ट्रस्टकेवत!मानट्रቝኌस्टयों्ቛ ाराचुनावमेंभागलेनेकी�शामें

¶42

5 / 5

¶43

उनकेलिलयेयहअदिनवाय! शत! होगीदिकउन्हेंवत!मानमेंधारिरतअपनेप� सेइस्तीफा�ेनाहोगाजोदिकतत्काल्ቚ भावसेस्वीकृतमानाजावेगा तथानयेट्रቝኌस्टयों्ቛ ाराप�भार्ቇ हणकरनेकेपूव! तककाय!वाहककेरूप मेंउ3 प�परकाय! करनेकीअनुमतितरहेगीपरन्तुऐसेट्रቝኌस्टयोंकोनीतित दिवषयकदिनण!यलेनेकाअतिधकारनहींहोगा।

¶44

From perusal of the aforesaid by-laws, it appears by virtue

¶45

of clause 24 (6) that the election of Respondents No.3 and 7 could have been questioned by the petitioner before the Committee, which is to be constituted under clause 23 (5) of the aforesaid by-laws. Having failed to avail the said remedy, the instant petition has been filed with the allegation that Respondents No.3 and 7 have been elected even without submission of their resignations, as required under clause 24 (7) of the said by-laws. However, a bare perusal of the document (Annexure R-1) filed by the Respondents No.3 to 7 in their return, it appears that they have submitted their resignations on 25.06.2021.

¶46

In view of the aforesaid background, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. The petition being devoid of merit is accordingly, dismissed.

¶47

No order as to costs.

¶48

vivek

Moolchand Kocher (Jain) v. the Registrar Public Trust

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moolchand Kocher (Jain) v. the Registrar Public Trust

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Budhiram Vs Chief Managing Director

The Ombudsman Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Vs C.G. State Information Commissioner

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Mahadev And Ors.

Anil Khandelwal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Kumar Soni Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Ramvishal Vs Chief Managing Director