JUDGMENT :- This appeal is preferred by the appellants feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner on an application under Section 47 of the Bombay Public Trust Act filed by the respondents.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows There is a Trust known as 'Saibaba Seva Mandai, Nagpur'. There are disputes between the trustees since long. Applications for change are also pending. One Jayant Uttarwar, who is the ex-secretary of the Trust, moved the application under Section 47 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. Said Jayant Uttarwar contends that he has been working along with the other trustees for last so many years and has developed the temple of the Trust to today's status. He contends that he has devoted his entire life in the service of the Trust and has collected funds which were required for the construction of the temple. He submits that he is, therefore, the person having interest in the Trust. The Deputy Charity Commissioner had, on an application No.6 of 1992, framed a scheme for the said Trust. The said order of the Deputy Charity Commissioner was challenged before the District Judge and the matter was ultimately decided by the High Court in First Appeal No.351 of 1998. The scheme was modified by the High Court by order dated 10th of September, 1998 and it was directed to enroll the members and to hold the elections. The Assistant Charity Commissioner was directed to hold the elections and to enroll the members. Shri. J. R. Tungar, the Assistant Charity Commissioner, came to be appointed as an Election Officer. Elections were accordingly held on 29/11/1998 and Change report No.1819 of 1998 was filed before the Deputy Charity Commissioner. The said change report was rejected on 7/8/2008. The Charity Commissioner found that the members were not enrolled as per the provisions of the scheme and were, therefore, election was not legal and valid. The order was challenged in appeal before the Joint Charity Commissioner. He confirmed the said order. It is not in dispute that the said order has also been confirmed by the District Judge and the matter is now pending in the High Court. While these proceedings were pending, elections were shown to be held on 28/12/2004. According to the applicant - Shri. Uttarwar, the term of that body also expired on 27/12/2008. The change report enquiry No.894 of 2004 is, however, still pending. He contends that the said change report has become infructuous. According to him, therefore, today there is "no trustee situation". He submits that there is no legal management who can take care of the day to day affairs of the Trust. He submits that no Trust can be administered without the trustees and it has now become necessary to appoint new trustees. Accordingly, the said Jayant Uttarwar submitted an application under Section 47 suggesting the names of the persons to be appointed as trustees. Along with the said application, the bio-datas were submitted. The said application was submitted on 22/1/2009. Affidavit was filed on 30/1/2009 before the Charity Commissioner by the applicant and on 2/2/2009 an order appointing the persons mentioned in the application under Section 47 of the Act as trustees was passed. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal has been preferred by the appellants, who also claim to be the persons interested in the Trust.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the respondents.

4. We have seen that an application under Section 47 was moved because the Change report no.1819 of 1998 was rejected. It is not disputed that even an appeal under Section 72 before the District Judge has also been rejected. It is contended further that change report in respect of 2004 elections is still pending but the term is over on 27/12/2008. For this reason, it is alleged that the situation of there being no trustee has arisen.

5. The change report No.1819 of 1998 is mainly rejected on the ground that the members were improperly en

Click Here to Read the rest of this document