B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) AT issue, in these two writ petitions, is whether Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman of secunderabad and Hyderabad, is a charitable institution coming within the purview of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and hindu Religious Institutions and endowments Act, 1987.

( 2 ) THE cause of action for the above two writ petitions is the order dated 28-3-1995 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of endowments, Twin cities, Hyderabad the 2nd respondent herein - appointing the 3rd respondent, namely, Dr. F. D. Vakil, as the single Trustee of the above Trust. The above proceeding was issued on the premise that the above trust is a charitable institution within the meaning of the Act.

( 3 ) IN W. P. No. 6274 of 1995, the first petitioner is the Anjuman Trust, while the petitioners 2 to 6 are the trustees. In w. P. No. 13135/95, the petitioner is a member of the founder-donor family of the above trust. She has appeared as a party-in-person. In W. P. No. 6274/95, respondents 4 to 7 were impleaded. Respondent No. 6 is mr. B. F. Dittia, at whose instance, the proceedings were initiated culminating into impugned order. He had also represented as a party-in-person. To avoid confusion, we refer the 1st petitioner as petitioner-Trust and the party-in-person in W. P. No. 6274/95 (sic. 13135/95) as the petitioner - party-in-person, and respondent No. 6 in w. P. No. 6274/95 as the respondent - party-in-person. The Deputy Commissioner of endowments, Hyderabad is referred to as the 1st respondent while the Assistant commissioner, Endowments, Twin Cities of hyderabad as the 2nd respondent and dr. F. D. Vakil, the single Trustee appointed by the respondents 1 and 2 as the 3rd respondent. 3a. THE petitioner-trust was formed on 15-12-1941. It was registered under hyderabad Endowment Regulations, 1349 f. The above regulations framed during the period of Government of Hyderabad were repealed and a comprehensive legislation for the entire State of Andhra Pradesh was enacted, namely, the Andhra Pradesh charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, hereinafter referred to as a. P. Act of 1966 . A. P. Act of 1966 was repealed and in its place, the andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu religious Institutions and Endowments act, 1987 (A. P. Act 30 of 1987) was enacted. The said Act is hereinafter referred to as the a. P. Act of 1987 . The dispute had started when a notice has been issued by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner-trust calling upon the person-in-charge to submit the records and accounts of the petitioner-trust for verification and assessment. In fact, the said notice was issued at the instance of the respondent- party-in-person, who had alleged that the property at Boggulkunta bearing Municipal No. 4-1-1225 was sold without obtaining any permission and without following the procedure as contemplated under Section 80 of A. P. Act of 1987. This was on the premise that the petitioner-trust is covered by A. P. Act of 1987. In fact, the allegation was that the petitioner-trust was being mismanaged and that amounts were being embezzled. The 2nd respondent had exercised his powers under A. P. Act of 1987 on the ground that the Endowment Department had control over the petitioner-trust as the Trust Deed indicates that it was formed for the welfare of a section of community and that it was the bounden duty of the Endowment department to probe into the affairs and to safeguard the interests of the institution. On the other hand, the petitioners-trustees did not submit to the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent on the ground that the petitioner-trust is not governed by A. P. Act of 1987 and that it was not registered so and as such, there was no liability on their part to submit either accounts or documents. There were repeated reminders, but the petitioner-trust has stuck to its stand. The 2nd respondent had ignored the said protest and by his proceedings dated 28-3-1995 had appointed the 3rd respondent as single Trustee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document