IMPORTANT POINT
The Public Trust must be impleaded in appeals concerning its registration to ensure proper adjudication of disputes.

ORDER :

Nupur Bhati, J.

1. Though the matter has been listed in the 'Fresh' category, upon the joint request of both the parties, the matter was heard finally on 05.12.2024.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 challenging the order dated 11.11.2024 (Annex.6) passed by Commissioner, Devsthan Department, Udaipur, Rajasthan ('Commissioner') in Appeal No. 02/2024, titled 'Ramesh Kumar Dhakad & Anr. v. Ambalal Dhakad & Ors.' whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') has been rejected.

3. The writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that by way of an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

A. This Hon'ble Court may kindly quash the impugned order dated 11.11.2024 (Annexure-6) passed in Appeal No. 02/2024 titled 'Ramesh Kumar Dhakad & Anr. v. Ambalal Dhakad & Ors., by Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Udaipur;

B. As a corollary, this Hon'ble Court may kindly allow the application under Order I Rule 10 CPC, filed by the petitioner, for impleadment of the public trust as party respondent, in the appeal pending under Section 20 of the Act of 1959;

C. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which the circumstances of the case may warrant be also passed in favour of the petitioner.”

4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner submitted Form No. 6 under Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1950 ('Act of 1950'), on 07.03.2017 for the registration of the Public Trust, Shri Khetpal Bavji (Jai Bherunath) Trust ['Public Trust'], which was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner (First), Devsthan Department, Jaipur on 29.12.2023 (Annex.3). Aggrieved of the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, the respondent no. 3 and 4 preferred an appeal (Annex.4) before the Commissioner under Section 20 of the Act of 1950.

5. Thereafter, since the Public Trust was not made a party to the appeal, the petitioner filed an application under Order I Rule 10 of CPC seeking impleadment of the Public Trust as a party to the appeal (Annex.4), which came to be rejected by the Commissioner, vide order dated 11.11.2024 (Annex.6).

6. Thus, aggrieved of the order dated 11.11.2024 (Annex.6), passed by the Commissioner, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Commissioner has erred in law while rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC, inasmuch as after the Assistant Commissioner had allowed the application filed by the petitioner under Form No. 6 of the Act of 1950, vide order dated 29.12.2023 (Annex.3), the Public Trust becomes a distinct juristic entity and therefore, is a necessary party to the dispute, and ought to have been impleaded in the appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sudhir G. Angur and ors. v. M. Sanjeev and ors., (2006) 1 SCC 141.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents no. 3 and 4 submitted that the Commissioner has rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC, inasmuch as the Public Trust is not registered because vide order dated 29.12.2023 (Annex.3), the Assistant Commissioner had merely recorded a finding in accordance with Section 19 of the Act of 1950, however, the entries as per Section 21 of the Act of 1950 have still not been made, which makes the registration of the Public Trust ineffective. He thus submitted that as the entries have not been made, the Public Trust cannot be considered to be registered in accordance with the law and thus, the Public Trust was rightly not impleaded as party to the appeal.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents no. 3 and 4 further submitted that Section 29 of the Act of 1950 bars an unregistered Public Trust from filing a suit to enforc