1. Heard. Admit. By consent heard finally at admission stage. Record and proceedings received.

2. The appellants in Appeal No.1633/2012 filed Application No.11/2011 under section 47 of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 for their appointment as trustees. Similar application was preferred by Arun Dattatraya Mahale and others being Application No. 9/2011 before Joint Charity Commissioner (for short 'Jt. C.C.') under section 47 of Bombay Public Trust Act. The appellants in First Appeal No.1728/2012 were intervenors in two applications referred above opposed Application Nos.9/2011 and 11/2011 and from their group, two persons were nominated as trustees by the Jt. C.C.

3. Grievance is, the Jt. C.C., Nashik Division, Nashik did not follow the procedure contemplated under section 47 of the Trust Act and based on assumptions and presumptions, entertained Application No.9/2011 with two intervenors in appointing trustees. The appellant - Vilas and others assert that they are native of village Chimthane, their ancestors were members and office bearers of trust, they are even ex-students of the school conducted by the trust, they are members of the trust since 1991 and they have natural affection and attachment towards trust, hence, they are personal interest in the trust.

FACTS :-

4. On 16.6.1982 the trust was registered under Bombay Public Trust Act, created under Memorandum of Association, prepared by founder Members. The Memorandum of Association provides for constitution of two bodies for management namely General Body and Managing Committee. The General Body consist of members, who provided financial assistance to the trust as provided in Clause (4) of Memorandum of Association. The Managing Committee was to be of 12 persons, they were to be elected from General Body.

5. The common grievance of the appellants is, 7 out of 10 newly appointed trustees have no concern or interest with the trust, they are resident of Dhule and other parts, no concern with well being of the school or the trust and village Chimthane. It is alleged, these 7 trustees are themselves politicians or family members of local politicians from Dhule, who desire to have control over all social activities in district Dhule by grabbing several trusts.

6. Mr. V.D. Hon, learned counsel for appellants says, by reading the order under challenge no safeguards under section 47 of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 are followed, no procedure as contemplated is seen to have been followed. From the list of appointed persons namely Ananta Barka Chaudhari and Himmat Daga Patil, who have not applied, but still they are appointed by impugned order. Without any justification, the Application bearing No.11/2011 is rejected, solely on the ground that grandfather of Pankaj Yashwant Chaudhari was removed as a trustees under section 41-D of Trust Act. He says, whatever misdeed, having done in past by grandfather of Pankaj Chaudhari, cannot be branded to eclipse Pankaj Chaudhari from trustee.

7. Mr. P.M. Shah, learned Senior Counsel for appellants in F.A. No.1728/2012 pointed out effect of section 47, which contemplate, any person interested in public trust will inclusive in definition of 'any Member of such society'. The persons who had applied (who have been nominated as trustees) have no interest in the trust. There were no reasons or special cause for learned Jt. C.C. to nominate Shri. Arun Dattatraya Mahale, solely on the ground that he is social worker, but, it should have been considered that he hails from Dhule, his background or none of the other trustees' background was verified to show that how they have got interest in upliftment of the trust. He has criticized the judgment of the Jt. C.C. on the ground that no proper reasons are assigned for nominating the trustees. The intervention application is erroneously dealt with. Inspite of depositing cost on 1st March 2012, the learned Jt. C.C. recorded, it is not deposited. This is factual incorrect assumption. The appellants' intent is ga