Section 56B of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, does not mandate the giving of notice to the Charity Commissioner in an enquiry under section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act for the acquisition of land belonging to a public trust.

MOHTA, J. :- Does section 56B of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, mandate giving of a notice by the Land Acquisition Officer to the Charity Commissioner in respect of enquiry under section 5A of the Land

Acquisition Act for acquisition of land belonging to a Public Trust is a crucial point that arises in this petition.

2. Section 56B of the BPT Act reads thus : -

"(1) In any suit or legal proceedings in which x x x x any question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose is involved, the Court shall not proceed to determine such question until after notice has been given to the Charity Commissioner.

(2) If upon the receipt of such notice or otherwise the Charity Commissioner makes any application in that behalf, he shall be added as a party at any stage of such suit or proceedings.

(3) In this section "Court" shall mean any Civil Court of competent jurisdiction in the State of Maharashtra."

Contention is that whenever any question affecting a public trust is involved in any legal proceedings, notice contemplated by subsection (1) is a must. Now the use of phraseology, "any question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose" in sub-section (1) and restricted meaning given to the term "Court" in sub-section (3) is significant. This exhibits clear legislative intention of giving mandate of giving notice only against "Court" and that too if question affecting a "public religious or charitable purpose" is involved The words "public trust" are not used. By no stretch of imagination the two can be equated. The later connotes an entity and former the purpose of the said entity. There can be no manner of doubt that in certain proceedings against the public trust question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose can be involved. But this does not mean that whenever a public trust is likely to be adversely affected in any manner in any proceedings it has an impact on its purpose.

Unless determination of a question has an effect on the purpose as such, section 56B cannot be attracted. Such effect must be direct and proximate and not indirect or remote as held, even in the case of Jagmohandas v. Jamnadas, AIR 1965 Guj 181 on which strong reliance was palced on behalf of the petitioner. This case related to the appointment of trustee under a scheme for managing a charity under section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code. It has been held therein that appointment of a proper person has direct bearing on the purpose of the trust, for an unfit person is bound to adversely affect the public religious or charitable purpose. It is contended before us on that analogy that whenever the property of the trust is acquired, it is bound to have its reflection on the income and assets of the trust which if adversely affected is bound to have its impact on the purpose of the trust. If this line of reasoning is accepted, even eviction suits, execution proceedings or for a matter of that any action against a public trust would attract the bar. If that was the legislative intention, nothing prevented the legislature from using the term "trust" in place of "purpose". In the case of Tribhovandas v. Ratilal AIR 1968 SC 372, interpreting this very section, the Supreme Court has held that "a suit to enforce a mortgage or a proceeding to enforce a mortgage decree against property belonging to a public trust is not a suit or proceeding in which a question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose is involved." In Shri Krishna A. Khasgiwale v. Sitaram L Rathi 1979 Bom CR 175 this Court has taken a view that execution proceedings against the property claimed to be belonging to a public trust does not attract this bar.

3. There is yet another angle looked from which it will be clear that in an enquiry under section 5-A of the L.A. Act before the Land Acquisition Officer, section 56-B is not attracted. In this connection, restrictive meaning given to the word "Court" in section 56-B(3) has to be noticed. Bar of section 56(B)(1) is a