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

2024 Supreme(Bom) 996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Arun R. Pedneker, J.
Jayshri and Ors. - Appellant
Vs.
Yashwantrao Manikrao Patil and Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 2660 of 2024 and Civil Application No. 4393 of 2024
Decided On : 04-10-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P.M. Nagargoje, Adv.
For the Respondents:S.S. Dande, AGP, D.J. Chaudhari h/f M.D. Shinde, V.D. Salunke, Advocates and R.N. Dhorde, Sr. Advocate i/b S.S. Dudhane, Adv.

Judicial officers must act independently; mere errors in judgment do not constitute grounds for disciplinary action unless misconduct is evident.

Headnote:(A) Bombay Public Trusts Act - Section 73-AA - Writ petition challenging the order of the Deputy Charity Commissioner directing elections for the Managing Committee of the Rural Education Society Murud - The petitioners alleged judicial impropriety against the Dy.C.C. regarding the timing and manner of the order passed on her last day in office. (Paras 1-20)

(B) Judicial Conduct - Allegations of impropriety against a judicial officer must be substantiated with clear evidence of misconduct or recklessness; mere errors in judgment do not warrant disciplinary action. (Paras 20-21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged the Dy.C.C.'s order dated 20.2.2024, which directed elections for the trust after rejecting their change reports. The petitioners alleged that the Dy.C.C. acted hastily on her last day in office without allowing them to present their case.

Findings of Court:
The Dy.C.C. acted within her rights to direct elections as the petitioners failed to file their objections timely and did not obtain a stay from the appellate authority.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Dy.C.C. acted with judicial impropriety and whether the elections should be stayed pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the Dy.C.C. had provided ample opportunity for the petitioners to present their case and that the allegations of impropriety were unfounded.

Result: Writ petition dismissed; petitioners to pay costs.

ORDER :

Arun R. Pedneker, J.

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners challenge the order dated 20.2.2024 passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Latur Region, Latur (hereinafter referred to as 'Dy.C.C.' for short) below Exh. 24 in Misc. Application No. 1138/2023 filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 13, seeking directions to conduct the elections of the Managing Committee of the trust - Rural Education Society Murud, Dist. Latur.

2. Brief facts, leading to filing of the writ petition are noted below :-

    Rural Education Society Murud, Taluka and District Latur is an educational trust, having its registration PTR No. F-7 (Latur) under Bombay Public Trusts Act as well as Societies Registration Act. Change Report (hereinafter referred to as 'C.R.' for short) No. 603/2016 was accepted for the period from 2016 to 2021 on 31.1.2017. During same period some vacancies arose for members, which were filled in by filing C.Rs. from time to time. Change Report Nos. 118/2021 and 200/2021 were filed before the Dy.C.C. for election to the term of 2021 to 2026. Both the C.Rs. were rejected by Dy.C.C. Latur vide orders dated 5.12.2023.

3. Appeal against the order of Dy.C.C. dated 5.12.2023 rejecting the above C.Rs. was filed and is pending before Joint Charity Commissioner (hereinafter referred to as 'Jt.C.C.' for short). Meanwhile Misc. Application No. 1038/2023 was filed by the 13 respondents/members before the Dy.C.C. praying therein to hold election to the trust in accordance with the earlier orders passed in the C.Rs. Notices were issued in Misc. Application No. 1038/2023 on 29.12.2023. Application was filed by the present petitioners under section 73-AA of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act for intervention in Misc. Application No. 1138/2023. Intervention application was allowed by Dy.C.C. vide order dated 12.2.2024 and liberty was granted to the petitioners to file their say/objections to the Misc. Application No. 1138/2023.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that the impugned order was passed on 20.2.2024 by the Dy.C.C. directing that elections of the trust be held amongst the 16 members and as such, the impugned order is challenged in the present writ petition.

5. While this Court was hearing this writ petition, very serious allegations are levelled against Dy.C.C. (respondent No. 14 - Smt. Heera Kashinath Shelke) by the petitioners as to judicial impropriety which is noted in para 1 and 2 of the order dated 8.3.2024 passed by this Court. The same is reproduced as below :-

    "1. Since there are personal allegations against the officer, who has passed the impugned order, leave to add that officer as party-respondent.

    2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 20.2.2024 the matter was listed at Sr. No. 60 for say of the petitioner. He has produced cause list of 20.2.2024 on record. 20.2.2024 was the last day of the officer, who passed the impugned order. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that she had applied on 16.2.2024 to the State for reliving her from the duty as she is to join on promoted post at Nanded. On 20.2.2024 is her last day on duty and in second session she has been relieved from the job as Dy.C.C. so as to join her new posting as Dy.C.C. Nanded. The learned counsel also submits that there are various complaints filed against her."

6. In view of the fact that the personal allegations were made against the respondent No. 14/authority, she was permitted to made party respondent in the writ petition and notice was issued to her. She has filed two affidavits dated 10.4.2024 and 2.8.2024. At the outset, I would examine the allegations made against the authority, who has passed the impugned order. In para Nos. 6 to 9 of writ petition, it is stated as under :-

    "6. .....Naturally, after adding of present petitioners as party respondents in the proceedings, it was necessary on the part of respondents to add them as party respondents in Misc. Application No. 1138/2023 as per the procedure and amended memo oug

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