JUDGMENT - PATEL J.N., J.:---Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The appellants out of whom the appellant No. 1 is the original non-applicant before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Amravati is impugning the decision dated 3rd April, 1996 in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 76 of 1993, by the Joint District Judge, Amravati upon an application filed under section 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as "Trust Act") which application came to be rejected under the said order. The appellants had preferred an application under section 72 of the Trust Act, before the District Judge, being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner dated 3rd June, 1993 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Amravati on the application made by the respondents under section 50-A of the Trust Act for framing scheme.

3. The subject-matter of the dispute relates to Shri Shukleshwar Deoshtan of Wathoda Shukleshwar. The indisputable facts are that the ancestors of the appellants namely-Bapuji Raghunath Inamdar (Gurav) was granted Inam of the Trust property on 23rd May, 1867, under which agricultural land bearing Survey No. 202, admeasuring 21 acres 28 gunthas of village Wathoda Shukleshwar was granted to Bapuji, so as to enable him to maintain the Shukleshwar Mahadev Temple, out of the income of the lands and also to maintain his family. It is under this grant that Bapuji Raghunath Inamdar became the owner of the agriculture land and incharge of Shukleshwar Mahadeo Temple. The litigation has a checkered history, as on previous occasion also an attempt was made to dislodge Tukaram son of Bapuji, on the ground that he has not been able to maintain the temple and carry out Pooja regularly, as the temple was not repaired nor it was lighted, but the same came to be turned down, there was another complaint against the appellants by the respondents that the deceased Tryambak has no issue and he died issueless, therefore a Receiver may be appointed. The same also came to be dismissed. The present appellants are the successors of deceased Tryambak Inamdar.

4. In the year 1960-61 Tryambakrao who had inherited the Inam by succession got the Deosthan registered as a Public Trust under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trust Act, and it was given registered Public Trust No. A-32 and the mode of succession came to be stated as "hereditary" in Column No. 4 of the Register of Trust, and this is how the temple as well as the agricultural land of which Inam was given in favour of Bapuji and has passed over to Tryambak Tukaram by way of succession became a Public Trust. The respondents moved the Assistant Charity Commissioner under section 50-A of the Trust Act, to frame a scheme. The said application came to be registered as Application No. 1 of 1988. After obtaining the report of the Inspector and hearing the parties in the matter, the Assistant Charity Commissioner found that the appellants and his father have not rendered the services to the temple and failed to perform Pooja and Archana as a result of which the Public Trust is suffering. It was also observed that the sole Trustee has been continuously negligent in getting the accounts of the Trust audited in time as required under the Trust Act, and though he is getting sufficient income by cultivation of the land, he is not performing his duties towards the temple i.e. the condition of the temple is deteriorating and further the sole Trustee who holds hereditary office is not performing the Pooja be appointed as Trustees, and therefore did not find any error or illegality in the decision of the Assistant Charity Commissioner and dismissed the application.

6. Mr. Bhavsar, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that, he is assailing the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner as well as the learned Joint District Judge, by raising the following substantial questions of law :

(a) Whether the respondents i.e. original applicants have locus s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document