Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1153
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
ANIL S. KILOR, J
Smt. Lalita Panjabrao Phalke, Shri Panjabrao Mohanji Phalke, Shri Nitin Panjabrao Phalke, Shri J.N.Chavne, Shri Murlidhar B. Nigot, Smt. Nilima Murlidhar Nigot, Smt. S.M.Phalke – Appellant
Versus
Shri Jeevan Tulshiram Phalke, Shri Dnyaneshwar Manikrao Nigot, Smt. Shakuntala Madhukar Phalke – Respondent
SECOND APPEAL NO. 191 OF 2011|SECOND APPEAL NO. 192 OF 2011
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Sunil V. Manohar, Shri A.A.Naik, Shri Y.N.Sambre
For the Respondents: Shri B.H.Shambharkar, Shri S.D.Chande
The court reaffirmed that any directions by the Charity Commissioner altering the composition and membership of a public trust violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution.
Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 - Sections 41A, 41D, and 70 - Jurisdiction of Charity Commissioner - Appeal against the order directing enrollment of new members in a trust - Court held that the directions were without jurisdiction and violated constitutional rights under Article 19(1)(c) - Widely settled principle that directions interfering with trust membership or elections constitute illegal exercise of authority. (Paras 48-54)
(B) Rights to form associations - Interference through statutory interventions that alter membership or governance structures infringes on fundamental rights. (Paras 25-30)
Facts of the case:
The appeals stemmed from challenges against the Joint Charity Commissioner's directives for enrollment based on alleged conditions requiring organizational changes in the trust, disputed by appellants as unconstitutional and outside proper jurisdiction.
Findings of Court:
The court found the Joint Charity Commissioner's order null and void, asserting it exceeded lawful authority under the Act and conflicting with basic rights of association.
Issues: Whether the Charity Commissioner had the lawful authority to mandate new member enrollment and elections under Section 41DC of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the Charity Commissioner's directions imposed unwarranted membership changes against the originally formed trust, infringing constitutional rights.
Result: Appeals allowed; previous orders set aside.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of trust issues and change reports (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. overview of legal proceedings (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. arguments regarding legal validity (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. court's critical analysis of jurisdiction (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. final ruling on appeals (Para 52 , 54 , 56) |
1. Leave to amend the prayer clause of Second Appeal No.191 of 2011 is granted. The amendment be carried out forthwith.
2. Heard.
3. The present appeals arise out of the decision allowing the Change Report No.1176 of 2003 and rejecting the Change Report No.788 of 2000 of a Trust viz. Chandrakant Shikshan Sanstha, Telkamptee, District : Nagpur, which was established in the year 1968.
4. Under Section 41D of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act of 1950”) a proceeding came to be initiated for suspension, removal and dismissal of President and Secretary of the above referred trust.
5. In the said proceedings namely Application No.6 of 1995 the Joint Charity Commissioner passed a judgment and order on 30/08/2003 holding that the charges against the trustees namely Punjabrao Phalke and Madhukarrao Phalke, Secretary and President, respectively, have not been proved and therefore, the application under Section 41D of the Act of 1950 was dismissed. However, it was directed to enroll new general body members by calling applications by making paper publication.
6. The above referred directions to enroll members, came to be challenged in Writ Petition No.946 of 2004 and in the meantime the paper publication was made, in response to which 44 applications were received and accordingly membership of 41 members was confirmed.
7. Thereafter, elections were held, in which new managing body was elected. Accordingly, the Change Report No.1176 of 2003 was filed.
8. The another Change Report No.788 of 2003 was filed as Shri M.M.Phalke, Shri M.A. Suke and Sau. S.M.Phalke tendered their resignations which were accepted and as Shri Gawali had expired, the vacancies occurred because of the same, were filled in by passing a resolution in general body meeting dated 24/02/2002.
9. The Change Report No.1176 of 2003 was rejected by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur vide judgment and order dated 28/04/2008. The same was carried in the appeal under Section 70 of the Act of 1950 by the respondent. The said appeal No.17 of 2008 came to be decided by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur vide judgment and order dated 30/11/2010, reversing the judgment and order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur dated 28/04/2008 and thereby accepting the Change Report No.1176 of 2003. The appellant then approached to the learned District Judge, Nagpur by filing Regular Civil Application No. 34 of 2010 under Section 72(1) of the Act of 1950. The learned District Judge, vide impugned judgment and order dated 28/04/2011, dismissed the said application confirming the judgment and order of the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur dated 30/11/2010. Second Appeal No. 192 of 2011 is arising out of the said judgment and order dated 28/04/2011 passed by the District Judge-14, Nagpur in Regular Civil Application No.34 of 2010.
10. Similarly, Change Report No.788 of 2000 was accepted by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur vide judgment and order dated 28/04/2008. The same was carried in appeal under Section 70 of the Act of 1950 by the respondent. The said Appeal No.13 of 2008 came to be decided by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur vide judgment and order dated 30/11/2010, reversing the judgment and order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur dated 28/04/2008 and thereby rejecting the Change Report No.788 of 2000. The appellants then approached the learned District Judge, Nagpur by filing Regular Civil Application No. 32 of 2010 under Section 72(1) of the Act of 1950. The learned District Judge, vide impugned judgment and order dated 28/04/2011, dismissed
