SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Bom) 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Mangesh S. Patil, S.G. Chapalgaonkar, JJ.
Umesh - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 7408 of 2022
Decided On : 13-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
V.V. Deshmukh, Advocate, S.B. Yawalkar, Advocate, S.P. Brahme, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
A resolution by the general body of a public trust to modify its rules is effective even if the change report is pending approval, and the validity of elections held under such modified rules is contingent upon the outcome of any appeals regarding those modifications.

Headnote:

Maharashtra Public Trusts Act - Charity Trust Administration - Sections 22, 41-A - The court discussed the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, particularly Sections 22 and 41-A, which govern the reporting of changes in trust rules and the authority of the Deputy Charity Commissioner. The court interpreted that changes approved by the general body of the trust are valid even if pending approval from the Charity Commissioner, and that the validity of elections held under disputed rules depends on the outcome of appeals regarding those rules. This legal framework influenced the court's decision to dismiss the petition challenging the election results.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, members of an education society registered as a public trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, challenged the legality of an election conducted despite a pending change application regarding election rules, specifically rule 22-A, which had not been approved.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the elections held were valid as the general body had passed a resolution to modify the rules, and the pending appeal regarding rule 22-A did not invalidate the elections. The Deputy Charity Commissioner was not required to intervene as the elections were subject to the outcome of the pending change application.

Issues: Whether the elections held under the modified rules were valid despite the pending approval of rule 22-A and whether the Deputy Charity Commissioner should have directed fresh elections.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a resolution by the general body to modify election rules is sufficient to effect change, and the validity of elections conducted under such rules is contingent upon the final decision regarding the pending change application. The court emphasized that the refusal of approval to rule 22-A does not suspend its operation while an appeal is pending.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the court ruled that the elections conducted were valid, with the outcome subject to the final decision on the change application regarding rule 22-A.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

MANGESH S.PATIL, J. - We have heard both the sides.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. At the joint request of the parties, the matter is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission.

3. The petitioners who are the members of the respondents nos. 3 and 4 - Education Society registered as a public trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (Act) are questioning the legality and validity of the order passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon in a proceeding under Sec. 41-A of the Act whereby they were seeking a direction for better administration of the trust for holding fresh elections to be held in accordance with the approved rules of elections of the trust.

4. The basic bone of contention of Mr. Deshmukh learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that a general body of the trust had resolved to modify the rules of elections in a meeting held on 10/3/2019 inter alia modifying rule 22-A which provided a particular manner of voting should be undertaken at the election for electing managing committee. He would submit that change report no. 734 of 2019 was pending. It was partly allowed except the modification in rule 22-A. One Gokul Bhika Patil had approached this Court in writ petition no. 296 of 2022 raising an objection to the conduct of elections and this Court had passed the following order on 11/2/2022 :-

    "10. Considering now the further steps of elections are being conducted, we pass the following order :- ORDER (i) The voting scheduled on 13/2/2022 may be held, however, the results of the elections shall not be declared unless the orders are passed on Change Application No.734/2019 by the office of the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon.

(ii) The Deputy Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon shall endeavour to decide the said Change Application no. 734/2019 within one month. (iii) The petitioner and respondent nos. 2 and 3 shall appear before the office of the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon on 17/2/2022.

(iv) The further steps in the elections may be conducted in tune with the orders that may be passed in Change Application No.734/2019.

(v) Needless to state, we have not observed anything on merits of the amendment of the bye-laws. It is for the office of the Deputy Charity Commissioner to take decision on its own merits. (vi) The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (vii) Authenticated copy be given."

The learned advocate would submit that in spite of such a direction, the elections have been held ignoring the fact that rule 22-A was not approved of and the election is void ab initio. He would submit that even if the petitioners can raise this dispute in a change report to be filed pursuant to such election when the election has been held in the afore-mentioned facts and circumstances, the circumstances would go to the root of the validity of the election and the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner ought to have issued directions in the light of the enabling provision contained in Sec. 41-A of the Act directing a fresh election for the better administration.

5. Mr. Deshmukh would rely upon decisions of this Court in the matter of Sthanakwasi Jain Sangh, Shrirampur V. Deepak Hukumchand Duggad; AIR Online 2020 Bom 2013 and the decision of the learned Single Judge of Gujarat High Court in the matter of Rashmikant Chhaganbhai Patel V. Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara and others; AIR 2006 GUJARAT 9.

6. Per contra, Mr. Brahme would submits that already this Court had an occasion to consider the peculiar facts and circumstances in a writ petition filed by one Kalyan Sahebrao Patil bearing writ petition no. 6711 of 2022 decided on 22/11/2022. The earlier decision in writ petition no. 296 of 2022 dtd. 11/2/2022 (supra) was also brought to the notice of this Court. He would point out that when admittedly the decision in the change application no. 734 of 2019 discarding clause 22-A is a subject matter of the statutory appeal before the Joint Charity Commissioner, this Co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top