This is an appeal challenging judgment and order passed by the Ad hoc District Judge - 3, Latur on 18-2-2009 in Civil Miscellaneous Application (Trust) No. 191/2008 thereby confirming the judgment and order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Latur in Revision Application No. 31/2007 decided on 1-9-2008.

2. Appellant No.1 herein presented change report under section 22 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 to the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Latur Region, Latur on 27-12-2006. Change report pertains to the election of the Executive Committee of the trust namely Mahatma Basweshwar Shikshan Prasarak MandaI, Kharosa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. Latur. Appellant No. 1 intimated the change occurred in the constitution of the Managing Committee of the trust in pursuance to the elections of the office bearers held on 7-8-2006. On presentation of the change report the Deputy Charity Commissioner by order dt. 5-2-2007 accepted the same and directed to make consequential amendments in Schedule 1.

It is recorded in the order passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner that the applicant has submitted consent letter of the incoming trustees and no objection letter from the outgoing trustees which are placed on record. On perusal of the original notice book and the proceeding book, the Deputy Charity Commissioner directed acceptance of change. Respondents herein whose names find place on record as outgoing trustees presented revision application bearing No. 31/2007 to the Joint Charity Commissioner, Latur Region, Latur. It was the contention of the respondents herein that acceptance of change by the Deputy Charity Commissioner is illegal as no notices were issued to the outgoing trustees. It is also further contended that the change report itself was presented beyond the period prescribed under section 22 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. Apart from this, there was no application seeking condonation of delay tendered to the Assistant Charity Commissioner by the appellants herein i.e. newly elected trustees. Thus, it is contended that it was not open for the Deputy Charity Commissioner to direct acceptance of change without issuing notice to the outgoing trustees.

Revision application was resisted by the appellants herein, incoming trustees, on the ground of maintainability. It is contended that the revision application cannot be entertained beyond the period prescribed for entertaining appeal under section 70 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. According to the appellants, the outgoing trustees had given no objection for registering the change. As such, it was not necessary for the Deputy Charity Commissioner to issue notice calling upon the outgoing trustees to submit their say. The Joint Charity Commissioner who decided the revision application was pleased to allow the same and therefore the matter came to be remitted to Deputy Charity Commissioner for holding fresh enquiry. The reporting trustees were given an opportunity to tender an application seeking condonation of delay and on consideration of such application the Deputy Charity Commissioner was directed to deal with the application presented under section 22 of the Act.

3. Judgment and order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner was subjected to challenge by presenting application under section 72 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 by the incoming trustees. Application came to be heard and disposed of by the Ad hoc District Judge - 3, Latur who was pleased to dismiss the same by order dt. 18-2-2009.

4. At the stage of admission of the appeal, this Court formulated following substantial question of law:

Whether the Joint Charity Commissioner, Latur committed error in entertaining revision under section 70A in view of Bar under sub-section (2) of section 70A read with section 70(1)(b) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and whether the order of remand passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner is sustainable in law?

5. it is strenuously urged by learned counsel for the appellants that the