Important Point-While issuing direction under Sec. 41A of the Act Charity Commissioner has no adjudicatory powers and cannot decide lis between parties.

M.R. Shah, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 12-9-2013, passed in Special Civil Application No. 7662 of 2013, by which, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the said Special Civil Application preferred by the appellants herein-original petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the "petitioners") confirming the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner passed in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Sec. 41A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the "Trust Act") issuing directions for undertaking procedure for revoking or rescinding the Resolution dated 6-1-2013 of the Trust and till the same is revoked, suspending the same, original petitioners have preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal. The facts leading to the present Letters Patent Appeal in nutshell are as under:

"1.1. That the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 herein are the trustees in the trust called "Petrochemicals Township Devasthan Trust", duly registered as public charitable trust and governed by the provision of Trust Act. That the respondent No. 1 herein is one of the Trustees and in addition thereto, functioning as Secretary of the Trust and discharging duties as such. That Resolution dated 6-1-2013 came to be passed suspending respondent No. 1 from acting as a Trustee, Secretary and prohibiting him from entering into the premises of the temple complex, pending the inquiry about reported incident alleged to have been occurred on 3-1-2013, wherein respondent No. 1 herein-original applicant was attributed with an action of assault on other office-bearers. That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid action/resolution, respondent No. 1 herein-original applicant approached the Joint Charity Commissioner for appropriate directions in exercise of powers under Sec. 41A of the Trust Act. That the Joint Charity Commissioner issued the directions vide its order dated 30-3-2013, by which, in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Sec. 41A of the Trust Act directed the Trust/Trustees of the Trust to act as per the Constitution of the Trust/as per the Public Trust Act and directed to stay implementation, operation and execution of the Resolution dated 6-1-2013 till appropriate further steps are taken in consonance with/accordance with the Constitution of the Trust and Trust Act.

1.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner dated 30-3-2013 passed in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Sec. 41A of the Trust Act, the appellants herein - original petitioners preferred aforesaid Special Civil Application No. 7662 of 2013 before this Court."

2. It was mainly contended on behalf of the petitioners that order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner was beyond the scope and ambit of Sec. 41A of the Trust Act. It was submitted that, therefore, the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner was not within his jurisdiction. It was further submitted that the Joint Charity Commissioner had no jurisdiction under Sec. 41A of the Act to consider the legality and validity of the resolution, more particularly, with respect to suspension of the Trustee/Secretary. It was also submitted before the learned Single Judge that even the Resolution dated 6-1-2013 suspending the respondent No. 1 as a Trustee/Member/Secretary in a given situation like one on hand, was absolutely just and proper and in accordance with the provisions of the Trust-Deed and the prevalent provision of law. Therefore, it was submitted that the action of the Trust passing the Resolution dated 6-1-2013 cannot be treated to be as open to scrutiny at the end of either Charity Commissioner or Joint Charity Commissioner in exercise of powers under Sec. 41A of the Trust Act.

2.1. On the other hand, it was contended on behalf of the respondent No. 1 that the Resolution dated 6-1-2013 was absolutely in contraven