Point of Law: Section 2(13) of the Trusts Act when the petitioner Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act and the same is registered for charitable purposes, it is deemed to be a charitable Trust.

ORDER :

1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of Indian, in which, the petitioners have prayed that the order dated 10.02.2021 passed by respondent No.1 in Misc. Application No.15 of 2021 be quashed and set aside.

2. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.S.N. Soparkar assisted by learned advocate Mr.Aditya A. Gupta for the petitioners and learned Senior Advocate Mr.Mihir Thakore assisted by learned advocate Ms.Mamta R. Vyas for respondent Nos.2 to 7.

3. The factual matrix of the case is as under:

3.1 It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 is a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which was registered on 03.02.2011. It is stated that the Charity Commissioner issued show cause notice dated 05.08.2019 to some of the members of the governing body of the petitioner Society calling upon the said members to show cause as to why the petitioner Society should not be registered under the Gujarat Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as “the Trusts Act”); as to why the registration of the petitioner Society should not be cancelled and as to why prosecution should not be initiated against them for not registering the society under the Trusts Act. It is stated that pursuant to the showcause notice, it was agreed amongst the members of the governing body of the petitioner Society that appropriate reply should be filed opposing the notice issued by the Charity Commissioner. However, the then Chairman of the petitioner Society Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel deceptively got the signatures of the members of the governing body of the petitioner Society on the reply and consented to register the petitioner Society under the Trusts Act. Thereafter, the Charity Commissioner passed an order on 30.01.2020 directing the members to move an application before the Deputy Charity Commissioner to register the petitioner Society as Trust under the Trusts Act. It is stated that the petitioners have challenged the said order by filing Special Civil Application Nos.6591 of 2020 and 11024 of 2020 before this Court. This Court has issued notice in the said petitions.

3.2 It is alleged that as the then Chairman Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel was acting against the interest of the petitioner Society, he was removed from the post of Chairman vide Resolution dated 02.07.2020 and, thereafter, he was removed as Member of the governing body vide Resolution dated 18.07.2020. It is stated that illegal meeting was scheduled on 16.07.2020, which was cancelled by the petitioner Society. It is also stated that Civil Suit has been filed by the petitioner against Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel and the City Civil Court vide order dated 30.09.2020 has granted interim relief in favour of the petitioner Society and, thereby, restrained Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel to represent the Society in any manner. Said Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel has filed AO No.104 of 2020 before this Court, which is pending.

3.3 It is also stated that Civil Suit No.628 of 2020 has been filed by Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel for declaration that Resolutions dated 02.07.2020 and 18.07.2020 passed by the petitioners are bad in law. The said suit is pending.

3.4 It is further stated that in pursuance of the order dated 30.01.2020 passed by the Charity Commissioner, the then Chairman Mr.Jayesh Bhogilal Patel submitted an application dated 27.07.2020 under Section 18 of the Trusts Act for registering the Trust before the Deputy Charity Commissioner, on the basis of which, inquiry under Section 19 of the Trusts Act has been initiated by the Deputy Charity Commissioner. Thereafter, on 17.10.2020, the petitioner Society moved a withdrawal application before the Deputy Charity Commissioner and prayed that it does not want to pursue the said application for registering the petitioner Society under the Trusts Act. The Deputy Charity Commissioner decided to hear such application with the main matter and, therefore, the petitioners have challenged the said