The court highlighted the importance of considering the provisions in the trust scheme and potential consequences of decisions for efficient management of the trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.

JUDGMENT

Sunil B. Shukre, J. - Hearing is conducted through Video Conferencing and all the learned Advocates agreed that the audio and video quality was proper.

2. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. This petition questions the legality and correctness of three orders passed on the same day, the date of 23rd November 2015. These three orders have been passed in Misc. Application Nos. 247 of 2015, 248 of 2015 and 249 of 2015 .

4. The Misc. Application No.247 of 2015 was in respect of the objections taken by the petitioner as regards acceptance of applications made by different persons including employees of the Trust for membership and by the order passed on 23.11.2015, these objections were rejected.

5. The objections so taken were, inter alia, on the points that employees of the Trust who had applied for grant of membership, could not be admitted to the membership they being the employees of the Trust and that their similar applications made earlier have been rejected.

6. In Misc. Application No.248 of 2015 the issue involved was as regards the difference in number of applications actually made and number of applications shown in the public notice in respect of which objections were invited and clarification sought regarding the exact membership applications received. These applications were rejected on the same day of 23.11.2015 on the ground that the objector had not raised any objection to any of the membership applications.

7. Third application being Mis. Application No. 249 of 2015 was about grant of further time for raising an objection in pursuance of the public notice dated 29.10.2015 inviting such objections, which was also rejected on the same day of 23.11.2015 on the ground that the objector had not paid the copying fees for obtaining of the copies of the applications, dis- entitling him to get any further extension of time for raising of the objection.

8. Insofar as, the challenge made to the order dated 23rd November, 2015 passed in Misc. Civil Application No.249 of 2015 is concerned, we are of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of by issuing necessary directions which would facilitate re-hearing of the objections in a proper manner, which we propose to order for the reasons ensuing herein after. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner, on his making an application, be permitted to take the inspection of the entire record of the proceedings relating to the membership applications which are being granted by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner. We further direct that in case any application is made for grant of copy of any document of the proceedings, same shall be allowed on payment of such charges as may be permissible under the Rules and if there are no Rules in that regard, the leviable charges shall be as per the Civil Manual applicable to the District Courts. The Writ Petition to the extent it raises challenge in this regard is thus disposed of.

9. As regards the challenge made to the orders dated 23.11.2015 passed in each of the Misc. Civil Applications No.247 of 2015 and 248 of 2015, we find that these orders, as rightly submitted by the learned Senior Advocate, are the result of non-application of mind on the part of the learned Joint Charity Commissioner to the various provisions made in the scheme framed for the better and efficient management of the Trust, which is known as "Shri Saibaba Seva Mandal, Nagpur Trust" vide order 30th July 1996 passed in Application No.6 of 1992 under Section 50(A)(i) of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The reason being that if there were objections taken to the effect that the employees of the Trust could not be admitted to membership and that no single person could be given membership of the Trust simultaneously in different categories as Patron, Life Member and Ordinary Member and yet, some of the employees and some of the persons were sought to be admitted to the membership and in some cases even under diffe