IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ABHAY AHUJA, J.
Sanket Janardan Bhase – Petitioner
Vs.
The Assistant Charity Commissioner and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 6001 of 2022
Decided On : 22-07-2022
MPT Act - Challenge to rejection of application under Section 73A - Section 2(10) - Section 73A
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenges the rejection of his application to lead oral evidence in support of his application under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950. The proceedings relate to a change report filed by the reporting trustee of a trust. Petitioner claims the trust has become defunct and highlights violations by the existing trustees.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that the Petitioner does not qualify as a person having interest in the trust under Section 2(10) of the MPT Act. The court dismisses the petition, stating that the Petitioner's claims of involvement with the trust are unsubstantiated.
Issues: Challenge to rejection of application under Section 73A of the MPT Act based on the Petitioner's claimed interest in the trust.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applies the principle of ejusdem generis to interpret the definition of 'person having interest' under Section 2(10) of the MPT Act. It concludes that the Petitioner does not meet the criteria and dismisses the petition.
Final Decision: The petition is dismissed with no costs.
JUDGMENT :
ABHAY AHUJA, J.
1. By this Petition, Petitioner is challenging the order dated 8th April, 2022 passed by the Respondent No. 1- the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Greater Mumbai Region, Mumbai in an application (Exh.38) for permitting him to lead oral evidence in support of his application under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 (“MPT Act”). The Assistant Charity Commissioner rejected the application and therefore, Petitioner is before this Court.
2. It is the contention of the Petitioner that he is a person having interest as defined under Section 2(10) of the MPT Act and as such pursuant to the section 73A, he ought to be joined as party to the proceedings before the Charity Commissioner. The proceedings before the Charity Commissioner relate to change report no. 1803/2011, with respect to the Respondent No. 2-Trust viz. Kokan Gyanpeeth, filed by the Respondent No. 3, who is the reporting trustee. Petitioner submits that the Respondent No. 3 had, in the year 2011 filed an application for change report no. 1803/2011 before the Respondent No. 1-Charity Commissioner for addition of his name as trustee, but till date no decision has been taken on the said change report. He submits that there have been no elections in the trust for more than 20 years and therefore, the trust has become defunct. He refers to two orders of the Charity Commissioner in support of his contention that no regular election has been held in the trust for more than 20 years and that the management of the trust is not being conducted in accordance with the terms of the constitution of the trust. He is aggrieved that no new members have been allowed to become members nor trustees. Petitioner contends that the trust has become non-functional and defunct since the year 1994 as despite the constitution of the said trust requiring a minimum of seven trustees, there are only two trustees viz. Shishir Dharkar and Anupama Dharkar. The two trustees have been illegally and wrongfully operating the Respondent No. 2-Trust. He submits that despite the trust having become defunct since last 25 years, the two trustees have been taking financial and other decisions of the Respondent No. 2-trust in an unlawful, illegal and arbitrary manner.
3. It is submitted that the Petitioner is an old student of the college conducted by Respondent No. 2-trust and has been volunteering the cause of Respondent No. 2 and working hard for the same since the year 2015, i.e. for last more than 7 years. That after becoming aware of the sorry state of affairs of the Respondent No. 2-Trust, the Petitioner volunteered for the trust, but he has not even been allowed to be admitted as member along with several other volunteers, who have worked for Respondent No. 2-trust and given time and years of life for its cause. It is submitted that now the said trust has become defunct with no elections, no admission of the new members and no proper quorum of trustees for last 20 years. Petitioner submits that the orders passed by the Charity Commissioner are clear proof of the gross violations committed by the two trustees in the operation and management of the Respondent No. 2-trust.
4. Mr. Bhavke, learned counsel for Petitioner submits that being pained by the state of affairs of the Trust, on 1st April, 2022, Petitioner as Objector filed an application for leading oral evidence in the Change Report application filed by Respondent No. 3 under Section 73A of the MPT Act. However, Respondent No. 1-the Assistant Charity Commissioner has vide order dated 8th April, 2022 rejected Petitioner’s application.
5. Mr. Bhavake, submits that the impugned order is bad in law in as much as the said order has clearly ignored the fact that the Petitioner is a person having interest in the trust. Learned counsel submits that Petitioner is not only an ex-student of a school run by the trust, but he is a Corporator, who has assisted in the development of roads next to the college being conducted by th
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.