1974 Supreme(Kar) 84
Karnataka High Court
R.R.DIWAKAR - Appellant
Versus
M.S.PATIL - Respondent
Decided On : 04-18-74
W.P. : 5834 of 1974
H.B.DATAR, JAYARAM NAIDU, K.J.SHETTY, K.SHIVASHANKAR BHAT, P.G.GOWRI, R.VENKATESWARA RAO
The Charity Commissioner has limited powers under the Act and cannot issue an injunction against the trustees unless such power is expressly conferred by or under the provisions of the Act.
Headnote:
Charity Commissioner - Public Trust - Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 - S. 3, S. 69, S. 70 - The court quashed the order of the Charity Commissioner restraining the petitioner from transferring or making any change in the trust property, holding that the Charity Commissioner had no power to issue an injunction against the trustees under the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, sole trustee of a public trust, challenged the validity of an order issued by the Charity Commissioner restraining him from transferring or making any change in the trust property. The petitioner approached the court praying for a writ to quash the said order, contending that it was beyond the powers of the Charity Commissioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the preliminary objection regarding the competence of the petitioner to maintain the writ petition and examined the relevant provisions of the Act to determine the validity of the Charity Commissioner's order. It held that the Charity Commissioner had no power to issue an injunction against the trustees under the Act.
Issues: Competence of the petitioner to maintain the writ petition, validity of the Charity Commissioner's order restraining the petitioner from alienating the trust property.
Ratio Decidendi: The Charity Commissioner's powers are limited to those conferred by or under the provisions of the Act, and there is no provision in the Act conferring power on the Charity Commissioner to issue an injunction against the trustees. The court also emphasized that the Charity Commissioner is a statutory authority with no general jurisdiction of a Civil Court.
Final Decision: The court made the rule absolute and issued a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Charity Commissioner. No order was made as to costs.
( 2 ) THE Charity Commissioner has issued an order restraining the petitioner from transferring or making any change in the trust property. The petitioner challenges the validity of the said order.
( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are: The, trust is engaged primarily in the publication of the Kannada Daily 'samyukta Karnataka' from its Hubli and bangalore Offices and also the publications of a Kannada Weekly called 'karmaveera' and a monthly journal called 'kasturi'. Upto the year 1969, the petitioner was the sole person in the management of the trust. Thereafter he appointed three either persons as co-trustees put of whom respondent 4 before, me was one it, is said that the appointment of the, co-trustees did not work well and was alleged to have been revoked by the petitioner on 14-6-1972. On 25-12-1973, the petitioner appointed three more persons as successor trustees. In this connection there are proceedings pending before the Asst Charity Cornmr including a miscellaneous complaint against the petitioner on the mis-management of the trust. During the pendency of these proceedings, respondent 4 filed an application for temporrry injunction complaining that the petitioner was trying to alienate the trust properties. He asked the Asst Charity Commr to restrain the petitioner or the successor-trustees from transferring or making any change in the trust properties. That application was opposed by the petitioner, on the contention, among others, that the authorities constituted under the Act have no power to issue a temporary injunction against the trustees of a public trust. The Asst Charity Commr accepted the said contention; but he referred the matter to the Charity Commr with the following observation :" My above stated conclusions would have been enough to reject the application as not tenable in this office But having regard to the scheme of the BPT Act, I am of the opinion that the matter does not end there. . . . . . Under the Act, the Charity Commr exercises a dual function, one as delegate of the Govt's power of superintendence of trusts and. second as an authority who is vested with quasi-judicial power to decide the questions under the Act. I am referring to the powers of the Chaiity Commr under the bpt Act for a specific purpose;. I may not ba kindly mis-understood as pointing out the functions and duties of the Charity Commr. My reference to his powers under the Act is with a particular object of submitting a report to him for exercising his superintending power as deemed fit. It is seen that various proceedings in respect of this trust are pending in this office. In Inquiry Nos. 291/72, it is stated that shri R. R. Diwakar has removed the co-trustees named therein. In inquiry No. 317/72, it is alleged that Shri R. R. Diwakar has removed three persons named therein from the Managing Committee. These two cases are pending In the meanwhile Sri R R. Diwakar has filed change report in this inquiry No 476/73 stating that he has retired and nominated three successive trustees. Shri H. G. Guttal has filed a change report in inquiry No. 279/74 stating that in view of the retirement of sri R. R. Diwakar, three persons named in the change report including h. G. Guttal have become the successor-trustees, in view of the earlier nomination made by Sri Diwakar. There is a miscellaneous complaint-petition in Inquiry No. GS-MSC. DWR. 21. C. 837/73-74 about the mismanagement and loss of the trust. Thus it is seen that there are four cases pending regarding the changes of the trustees and one case regarding mis-management etc of the trust property. Having regard to these proceedings, it appears tha,1 all is not well with the trust, its affairs and its