2024:BHC-AS:13237 signed by VARSHA VARSHA VIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date:

2024.03.19

18:13:01 varsha+0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2922 OF 2023

1. Dara H. Satpatiwala Age : 65 years Occupation : Service

2. Nevil M. Billimoria Age : 59 years Occupation : Service Both of Mumbai Indian inhabitants the Trustees of Pinnacle Global Foundation a Public Charitable Trust, registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1980 bearing Registration No. E-7182 (Pune) and having its registered office at Flat No. 805, “Ratna”, Sujay Garden Complex, Mukund Nagar, Near Swargate, Pune-411 037 … Petitioners vs.

1. Joint Charity Commissioner Pune Region, Pune having his address at

1, Dhole Patil Road, Sangamvadi, Pune Maharashtra 411 001 2. Darayus K. Palia Age : 62 years, Occupation :

Service of Mumbai Indian inhabitant, residing at G-23, Cusrow Baug, Colaba,Mumbai-400 001

3. Neville Sam Patel Age : 59 years, Occupation :

Service of Mumbai Indian inhabitant, residing at M-5, 2^nd Floor, Cusrow Baug, S. B. Singh Road, next to Electric House, Colaba, Mumbai- … Respondents

400 001.

Mr. Bhavik Lalan, a/w. Fateme T. i/b. LJ Law, for Petitioners.

Mr. B.B. Dahiphale, AGP for the State.

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 11^th MARCH, 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT:

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for final disposal.

2. This petition is filed for challenging order dated 15^th July 2022, passed by the Learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune region, Pune in Application No. 27 of 2022, filed by the petitioners under sub-section (3A) of Section 36A of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 (‘Trust Act’). The said application is rejected for want of jurisdiction.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the application has been erroneously dismissed on the ground that the learned Joint Charity Commissioner has no jurisdiction to decide the application filed under sub-section (3A) of Section 36A of the Trust Act. He submits that the Joint Charity Commissioner is empowered to exercise all the powers of the Charity Commissioner and hence has jurisdiction to decide the application filed by the petitioners. Learned counsel submitted that even though sub-section 3A of Section 36A provides for the grant of ex post facto sanction by the Charity Commissioner, even the Joint Charity Commissioner has jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioner to decide the said application.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the provision of Section 3A of the said Act under which the State Government appoints one or more officers to be called as Joint Charity Commissioners who shall subject to the control of the Charity Commissioner exercise all or any of the powers and perform all or any of the duties and functions of the Charity Commissioner. He further submits that sub-section (2) of Section 3A provides that the State Government can declare a Joint Charity Commissioner to be the Regional Head to Superintend, subject to the control of the Charity Commissioner. Learned counsel also relied upon the definition of ‘Joint Charity Commissioner’ under sub-section (7B) of Section 2 of the said Act, which states that the Joint Charity Commissioner means the Joint Charity Commissioner appointed under Section 3A.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners thus, submitted that a plain reading of Section 3A read with sub-section (7B) of Section 2 of the Trust Act, clearly indicates that the Joint Charity Commissioner would exercise the power of Charity Commissioner under sub-section (3A) of Section 36A of the Trust Act. In support of his submissions, learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs D. D. Khobragade¹. He particularly relied upon paragraphs 7 and 9 of the said decision which read as under:-

“7. It appears to me that section 3A of the Act has been so drafted by the Legislature as to avoid repeated reference to ‘Joint Charity Commissioner’ as

1 1969 MhLJ 910 and wh