Delay and laches bar the writ-applicant from challenging the Charity Commissioner's orders, which attained finality, as the applicant acquiesced their rights by inaction.

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of present writ-application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ-applicant herein has prayed for following reliefs :-

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIP be pleased to admit and allow this petition and be further pleased to issue writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2017 passed by the Id. Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. AA/46/97 as well as Order dated 10.09.1997 passed by the Charity Commissioner in Application No. 36/72/96.

(B) During the pendency and till final disposal of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIP be pleased to stay the operation of order dated 19.12.2017 passed by the Id. Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. AA/46/97 as well as Order dated 10.09.1997 passed by the Charity Commissioner in Application No. 36/72/96.

(C) YOUR LORDHSIP be pleased to grant any other further remedy that may deem fit in the eyes of justice, equity and good conscience.”

2. Pending the present writ-application the writ-applicant herein by way of draft amendment dated 25.2.2022 has prayed for amendment which has been allowed by this Court by order dated 12.12.2023. By virtue of the said amendment the writ-applicant herein has further prayed for the following reliefs :-

"9A(1) YOUR LORDSHIPS may Se pleased to pass appropriate writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside the order dated 30.03.2007 passed by Respondent no. 3 in Application No. 36/Parchuran/1/2007 (Annexure F), in the interest of justice;

9B(1) Pending admission, hearing and till final disposal of present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay operation, execution and implementation of impugned order dated 30.03.2007 passed by Respondent no. 3 in Application No. 36/Parchuran/1/2007 (Annexure F), and further be pleased to direct the parties to maintain status-quo with respect to the property in question, in the interest of justice;"

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ application read thus :-

3.1 Various piece and parcels of lands bearing Survey Nos.484, 485-paiki, 490-paiki and 491 situated at Mouje : Naroda, Ahmedabad were owned by the respondent No.4 Trust. The respondent No.4 applied for selling the lands before the Charity Commissioner, Ahmedabad i.e. respondent No.3. The office of the respondent No.3 issued public advertisement on 19.12.1996 inviting bids for the purpose of selling the property.

3.2 A bid came to be accepted in favour of the respondent No.5 by order dated 10.9.1997. By virtue of the said order dated 10.9.1997 the objections raised by all other parties came to be rejected granting six months time to complete the sale. The said order is duly produced at Annexure-C.

3.3 The writ-applicant herein as well as the respondent No.2 were bidders and were aggrieved by the said order passed by the respondent No.3 dated 10.9.1997 allowing bid of the highest amount of Rs.575.25 paise per square mtrs., in favour of the respondent No.5 i.e. Kailash Kalyan Creation Pvt. Ltd.

3.4 The respondent No.2 challenged the said order passed by the respondent No.3 dated 10.9.1997 by preferring an Appeal being Appeal No.46 of 1997 under Section 36 of the Gujarat Public Trust Act, 1950. The present writ-applicant was also joined as party respondent No.8. The writ-applicant herein was having common interest with other bidders.

3.5 The learned Tribunal granted interim relief by order dated 10.11.1997 in favour of the respondent No.2 which came to be vacated by order dated 23.3.2000. The same has not been challenged either by the respondent No.2 or by the writ-applicant herein.

3.6. Pending the Appeal proceedings the respondent No.4 approached the respondent No.3 seeking revival of the order passed by the respondent No.3 by preferring Application No.36/Misc./1/2007 which came to be allowed by the respondent No.3 by extending the time limit for completing the sale for further period of six mon