( 1 ) BOTH these petitions challenge one order dated 2. 8. 2006 made by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No. TEN. A. R. 1/03 and hence, both these petitions are heard together and disposed of by a common judgment. In light of the view that the Court is inclined to take, the matters have been heard finally. Rule. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective respondents in both the petitions waive service of Rule.

( 2 ) A Trust known by the name of Saurashtra Rachanatmak Samiti, Rajkot was holding properties consisting of shed No. 20 comprising of building and appurtenant land, as well as adjoining plot Nos. 63 and 64. The total area of the land in question was 3223 sq. yds. Admittedly the land is a lease hold land for a period of 99 years, while the shed was taken on hire purchase terms from Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation on 30. 8. 1973. On 1. 1. 2002 the Trust entered into a leave and licence agreement with one N. J. Patel Brass Works, Rajkot for a period of 11 months at a monthly premium of Rs. 33,500/ -. Subsequently on 3. 7. 2002 the Trust resolved to dispose of the aforesaid property and for this purpose a copy of the resolution passed by the Board of Trustees accompanied by Valuation report was submitted before the Charity Commissioner seeking permission to alienate the property. On 30. 8. 2002 the Joint Charity Commissioner issued a Public Notice published in local daily newspaper "fulchhab" (erroneously mentioned as "akila" by the Tribunal ). The public notice invited objections within fifteen days fixing 28. 9. 2002 as the date of hearing of the objections. It was further stated in the public notice that the property in question was to be disposed of for a total sum of Rs. 1. 61 crores in favour of M/s. Patel Brass Works.

( 3 ) THE record reveals that one Shri Rajendrakumar L. Mata filed objection on 17. 9. 2002 and one Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Jani filed objection on 10. 9. 2002. Shri Jani had stated in his objection that he was ready and willing to purchase the property for a sum of Rs. 1. 75 crores but on the date of hearing of the objections he did not remain present and requested for adjournment. The same was the position in relation to Shri Rajendrakumar L. Mata. The Joint Charity Commissioner after hearing the representative of the Trust rejected the request for adjournment made by the two objectors and came to the conclusion that on account of recession in the Khadi Industry the Trust was unable to continue with the production of Amber Charkhas in absence of any fresh orders in the preceding three years and therefore the Trust was found to be in the need of to dispose of the lease hold rights of the industrial shed and two plots. The Joint Charity Commissioner further held that as the offered price of Rs. 1. 61 crore was above the valuation of Rs. 1. 51 crores the proposal made by the Trust was legal and proper. The Joint Charity Commissioner therefore accorded his sanction on 3. 10. 2002. In the order it was further mentioned that the permission would remain operative for a period of six months within which time the trustees were required to act in furtherance of the proposal. The order made by the Joint Charity Commissioner came to be challenged by respondent No. 4 herein.

( 4 ) IT is an admitted position that the appellant did not remain present at the time of hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal, but after taking into consideration the grounds raised in the Memorandum of Appeal and the records and proceedings, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that for obtaining the best value of the properties of the trust the trustees ought to have applied for inviting competitive bids and the Joint Charity Commissioner ought to have, instead of inviting only objections, invited open bids after directing the trust to have the property vacated on expiry of the lease period. While disposing of the appeal the Tribunal has also made certain observations as regards method adopted by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document