IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY, (NAGPUR BENCH)
M.S. Jawalkar, J.
Dr. Avinash S/o. Herabba Dekate – Petitioner
Versus
The Joint Charity Commissioner – Respondent
First Appeal No.100/2019
Decided On : 26-07-2022
MPT Act - Removal of Trustees - Section 41-D - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, specifically Section 41-D, which allows for the suspension, removal, and dismissal of trustees for continuous neglect of duty, malfeasance, misfeasance, or breach of trust. The court highlighted the legal provisions and their interpretations, emphasizing the high degree of proof required for drastic actions such as removal of trustees.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, president of a registered Public Trust, challenged an order removing the appellants from trusteeship. The order was challenged on various grounds, including illegal proceedings against deceased individuals, lack of mention of tenure of removal, and non-cooperation for preparing audited accounts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the charges of disobedience of directions and obtaining donations forcibly were not proved against the appellant. The court also emphasized the lack of intentional disobedience and deliberate defiance of the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged disobedience of directions, failure to submit audited reports, and obtaining donations forcibly, leading to the removal of trustees.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the high degree of proof required for drastic actions such as removal of trustees under Section 41-D of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act. It highlighted the lack of intentional disobedience and deliberate defiance of the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, quashed and set aside the order of the Joint Charity Commissioner, and exonerated the appellants from the charges. The Civil Application for placing additional evidence on record was also allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Smt. M.S. Jawalkar, J .
1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4.
2. The present appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur in Application No.17/2006 under Section 41–D dated 15/12/2018. The appellant No. 1 is the president of Lokseva Shikshan Sanstha, Sirsi. It is registered Public Trust bearing registration No. F-683(N). The said Trust runs Pramilatai Dekate Girls Hostel and Vasantrao Naik Krushi Vidyalaya. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 claiming members of the trust, filed an application under Section 41-D of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act [for the brevity MPT Act], which was registered as Application No.17/2006. The appellant along with respondent Nos.4 and 5 were respondents while one Madhukar Begde, Rajesh Kune and D.B. Bhandakkar died during the pendency of the proceeding but no steps were taken by the applicants.
3. The respondent No.1, Joint Charity Commissioner conducted enquiry and passed the impugned order on 15/12/2018, whereby removed the appellants from trusteeship. The said order mainly challenged on the ground that the order is per se illegal as the enquiry was proceeded against three persons who were already dead and proceedings continued against them. Resultantly, one Madhukar Begde who is already dead is removed by that order. The order is also contrary to the provisions of law as it does not mention the tenure of removal. The Joint Charity Commissioner removed appellant No.1 for the disobedience of the directions in Application No.15/2004 dated 08/08/2004 and 10/08/2004. In fact, there is no disobedience of the orders as the said order communicated in the year 2006. Another ground for removal of appellants for non filing of audit reports, however, firstly it is the responsibility of the Secretary for which President cannot be removed, secondly due to non-cooperation by the headmistress, the audit report could not be prepared. For that reason there was enquiry conducted against Headmistress and she was removed from the post
4. The appellants submitted that due enquiry was conducted against headmistress. One of the ground for enquiry is non-cooperation for preparing an audited account. Later on she was terminated and entire audit was done and submitted to the Charity Commissioner. As such, there is no intentional delay or negligence on the part of appellants. One of the charge against appellant for removal is that the appellant No.1 obtained donation from students forcefully and Deputy Director imposed a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is submission of the appellants that the said donation was not obtained by the appellant and it was obtained by the earlier headmaster. The said fine was imposed on the headmaster of the school, therefore, appellants made representation and the said fine of Rs.1,00,000/- was reduced to Rs.10,000/- and since the headmaster was not having funds, the appellants gave hand loan to him. But the appellants were nowhere concern with the said donation. The applicant also filed Application (CAF) No 1279/2022 under Order 41, Rule 27 for allowing appellant to place on record documents in the form of additional evidence.The learned Counsel for appellant relied on citations –
2) Bombay Diocesan Trust Association Pvt. Ltd and others Vs. Dr. P.B. Amolik and others reported in (2017) 5 Bom CR 187.
3) Mukund Waman Thatte Vs. Sudhir Parshuram Chitale and others 2012 (3) Mh.L.J. 322.
4) Mallikarjunappa Sidramappa Bidve Vs. Joint Charity Commissioner 2008(1) Mh.L.J. 148.
5. The learned Counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the appeal and supported the order passed by Joint Charity Commissioner. The appellants were in persistent default in filing audit report from 1996 to 2014. It is co
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.