Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKAR
Bhagwat Sopan Bankar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. S.B. Talekar for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Pleader Mr. A.R. Kale for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and learned Advocate Mr. S.D. Kotkar holding for learned Advocate Mr. Tejas Kotkar for the applicants in Civil Application No.12385 of 2025.
3. It will not be out of place to mention here that Civil Application No.12385 of 2025 has been filed for intervention, wherein the applicant contends that he is the person, on whose complaint and representations, the State Government has intervened in the provisions of Shree Shanaishwar Devasthan Trust (Shingnapur) Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the “ Shingnapur Trust Act ”) and appointed an Administrator over the Trust and, therefore, he intends to intervene. We do not find any substance in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner. He might have filed complaint or representations, but he has no personal interest and has not demonstrated except by way of verification. No separate affidavit has also been filed showing his interest.
The court held that the appointment of an Administrator without following statutory procedures outlined in the Shingnapur Trust Act, 2018, is illegal and violates principles of reasonableness and tra....
The exercise of jurisdiction under Section 47 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, by the Charity Commissioner is subject to specific conditions precedent, including the absence of a validly c....
The appointment of non-hereditary trustees is valid under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act when there is evidence of mismanagement by hereditary trustees, and full legal procedures a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of the settlement of the scheme for the better administration of the trust under Section 50a(1) of the Trusts act, 1950, and the affi....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the procedures outlined in the Constitution of the Trust and upholding the authority of the Sanrakshan Mandal in dec....
The court clarified the authority of the Assistant Commissioner under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 and interpreted the eligibility criteria for trusteeship as per the amended constitution of the Tru....
The governing body's power to appoint an executive officer is limited to exceptional cases for a fixed duration. Hereditary trustees retain authority over internal administration, including staff app....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Assistant Commissioner does not have the power to declare an institution as a religious institution and appoint a fit person under Section....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
