The interpretation of 'person having interest' in Section 2(10) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, includes donors and potential beneficiaries, and the Deputy Charity Commissioner has the discretion to determine whether a prima facie case exists for granting permission to file a suit under Section 51 of the Act.

DHARMADHIKARI, J. :- This writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 29th Oct. 1971 passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Nagpur Region, Nagpur who is empowered with the powers of the Charity Commissioner under S. 51 of the

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, referred to hereinafter as the Act, granting permission to the respondents Nos. 1 to 12 to file a suit under S. 50 of the Act.

2. It appears from the record that the respondents Nos. 1 to 12 filed an application under Ss. 50 and 50A of the Act before the Charity Commissioner, Bombay, which was later on forwarded to the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Nagpur. In the said application these respondents alleged that they are the donors of the registered public trust run under the name and style of Shikshan Prasarak Mandal of Akot, referred to hereinafter as the Mandal. According to them, they are the persons interested in the Trust as they are the donors and their wards are also studying in the school run by the Trust. In the said application they had made several averments and allegations, including the allegation regarding certain irregularities in the management of the Trust as well as mishandling of the funds thereof. It was also contended by them that 19 persons had applied for the membership of the Mandal but their applications were rejected arbitrarily. It was also their grievance that the list of the members was not prepared prior to the election of the new Managing Body and the defaulters were allowed to participate in the election. Thus they challenged the election to the Managing Body itself. They have further claimed removal of the trustees and the declaration that the election held was illegal Among other allegations it was also contended in the application that the Managing Body has not complied with the direction given by the authorities and the management showed favouritism in the matter of employment. According to them, the Mandal and the Managing Body were totally unmindful of the interest of the education of students and they have also failed to comply with the policy laid down by the Government in the matters of employment of the persons belonging to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. It was further contended by the respondents Nos. 1 to 12 that they should be enrolled as members of the Mandal and the election held on 18th March 1971 should be declared as illegal. On these allegations they sought permission to file a suit under S. 50 of the Act. They had also prayed for appointment of new trustees and settlement of a scheme for the trust and such other reliefs as the ' Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

3. After this application was forwarded to the Deputy Charity Commissioner, he issued notices to the petitioners asking them to appear before him on 26th Oct. 1971 at the Rest House Akola. From the record it is clear that these notices were received by the petitioners sometime in the first or second week of Sept. 1971 itself. The petitioners appeared before the Deputy Charity Commissioner on 26-10-1971 through their counsel and asked for two months' time to file writ-ten-statement. This request was not granted. Thereafter the petitioners filed their statement on 26th Oct. 1971 itself and they also filed their notes of argument on 27 Oct. 1971.

4. After considering this reply and notes of argument, ultimately the Deputy Charity Commissioner vide his order dated 29th Oct. 1971 granted permission to the respondents Nos. 1 to 12 who were the applicants before him, to institute a suit as proposed. As already observed, it is this order which is challenged in this writ petition.

5. Shri Badiye the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners before us contended that the respondents Nos. 1 to 12 not being the members of the Society-Mandal are not persons having interest in the Trust and therefore, had no locus standi to file an application under section 51 of the Act. According to Shri Badiye, there