-:(1):-

7933

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

Office

Notes,

Office

Memoranda

of

Coram,

appearance,

Court's

orders or directions and

Registrar's orders.

Court's or Judge's orders.

WRIT PETITION NO. 7933 OF 2013

WITH CA/14791/2013 IN WP/7933/2013

RATNAKAR NATU CHOUDHARI AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

THE JOINT CHARITY COMMISSIONER, NASHIK REGION AND

OTHERS

***

Mr. V. D. Hon, Advocate h/f Mr. A. V. Hon,

Advocate for the Petitioners.

Mrs. Ujwala Agrawal, Advocate for Respondent

Nos.2 and 3.

***

CORAM: S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.

DATED: 31st JANUARY, 2014.

PER COURT:

1.

Heard.

2.

The present petitioner has filed an

application under section 41E of the

Maharashtra Public Trust Act before the

Assistant Charity Commissioner and claimed the

relief to the following effect:

"The opponents be restrained from

interviewing any candidates, nor to give any

appointment orders in respect of Mahatma Gandhi

-:(2):-

7933

Higher and Junior College, run by Warangaon

Education Society, Warangaon."

3. The Joint Charity Commissioner allowed the

said application and restrained the present

respondent from taking policy decisions,

including the decision of appointing teaching

and non-teaching staff in the school and

college run by the trust. The District Judge

allowed the appeal.

4.

Mr. Hon, learned counsel for the petitioner

states that the tenure of the present

respondents was for a period 2002 to 2007. The

elections were long over-due. However, still

the respondents continued illegally. According

to the learned counsel, the Assistant Charity

Commissioner, vide order dated 23rd November,

2012 had directed the Board of Trustees i.e.

the Respondents herein, to conduct the

elections within three months i.e. prior to

22nd February, 2013. The said elections are

not conducted. The respondents are illegally

sitting over and taking policy decisions

detrimental to the interest of the society so

-:(3):-

7933

also are recruiting the staff. The respondents

are not entitled to do so.

5.

According to the learned counsel, workable

arrangement was made. The same deserved to be

continued. The Joint Charity Commissioner had

considered all the legal aspects of the matter

and had rightly restrained the respondents from

taking

any

policy

decision,

including

recruitments.

According to the learned

counsel, the District Judge ought not to have

interfered with the order of the Joint Charity

Commissioner. The learned counsel further

submits that the District Judge, while allowing

the appeal, has exceeded his jurisdiction.

According to the learned counsel, the reasoning

adopted by the District Judge are perverse and

does not stand to any reasons.

6.

Mrs. Agrawal, learned counsel for the

Respondents, supports the judgment of the

District Judge and submits that the application

filed by the present petitioner under Section

41E of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 was itself

not maintainable. None of the ingredients of

-:(4):-

7933

Section 41E were satisfied, still the Joint

Charity Commissioner exceeded his jurisdiction

and clamped injunction against the present

respondents from taking policy decisions.

According to the learned counsel, the District

Judge rightly considered all the facets of the

matter and has passed the judgment which is in

consonance with the by-laws of the trust, more

particularly clause 23 (3). The learned

counsel further submits that, considering the

dispute raked up by the present petitioner and

the manner in which the order was passed by the

Joint Charity Commissioner it was necessary for

the District Judge to give declaration about

the right of the respondents to take decisions

in the interest and we