Bombay High Court
National Welfare Trust Through ... vs Iqbal Qureshi Mohammad Husanin ... on 18 April, 2016
Bench: S.P. Deshmukh
{1} wp4467-16
drp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4467 OF 2016
National Welfare Trust, Beed Dist-Beed PETITIONER
Through its President,
Mohammad Sirajoddin
S/o Safdarali Deshmukh,
Age - 66 years, Occ - Agriculturist
R/o Deshmukh Galli, Beed
Taluka and District - Beed
VERSUS
1.
Iqbal Qureshi Mohammad Husanin
Age - 65 years, Occ - Business,
R/o Chotiraj Gali,
RESPONDENTS
Beed, Taluka and District - Beed
2. Adv. Kalimur Raheman Zillur Raheman,
Age - 60 years, Occ - Advocate
R/o Kagji Darwaja, Beed
Taluka and District - Beed
3. Khan Mumtaj Fazal Mahammadkhan,
Age - 61 years, Occ - Household
R/o Kagji Darwaja, Beed
Taluka and District - Beed
4. Surayya Iqbak Qureshi,
Age - Major, Occ - Pensioner,
R/o Chotiraj Galli, Beed
Taluka and District - Beed
5. Joint Charity Commissioner,
Latur District - Latur
.......
Ms. Anjalli Dube (Bajpai), Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. V. G. Shelke, AGP for respondent-State
Mr. S. S. Kazi, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4
.......
{2} wp4467-16
[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.]
DATE : 18th APRIL, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned
advocates for the parties finally with consent.
2. Petitioner's case is that the change report, which has been
accepted under orders of Assistant Charity Commissioner dated
31st December, 2015 is subject matter of appeal before Joint
Charity Commissioner, Latur, bearing No.10 of 2016. According
to learned advocate for the petitioner, the appeal is bereft of
necessary parties and as such, could not be entertained and
accordingly an application had been moved before the Joint
Charity Commissioner bearing Exhibit No.33. It is the contention
of learned advocate for the petitioner that the change report,
upon election of members of the trust, has been submitted and
accepted, but elected members have not been made parties,
save the president.
3. According to learned advocate, having regard to prevailing
position of law as would be emerging from decision in case of
"Avtar Singh Hit V/s Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee and others"
in Appeal (Civil) No.4532 of 2006 dated 18th October, 2006, with
{3} wp4467-16
reference to paragraphs No.21 and 22 of the same, the appellate
proceedings before Joint Charity Commissioner cannot be said to
be maintainable. Aforesaid submission is tried to be buttressed
by a decision of Hon'ble Single Judge of this court in the case of
"Sheikh Yusuf Haji Sheikh Usman and Others V/s Haji Mohammad Jamil
Ahemad and Others" reported in 2015 (1) ALL M R 120. According to
learned advocate, it supports the cause of the petitioner.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner further refers to
provisions under the Civil Procedure Code, particularly Order XLI,
Rule 20 as also section 73 A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts
Act. It is submitted that an application moved pursuant to
section 73 A of the Act in respect of one of the elected members
has been accepted by the Joint Charity Commissioner. Having
regard to aforesaid, learned advocate submits that the appeal
must fail and deserves to be dismissed or at least issue with
regards to tenability of the appeal ought to have been decided
by the Joint Charity Commissioner pursuant to application
Exhibit-33, before proceeding with the appeal.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner further apprehends
that in case under an interim order, effect and operation of
change report gets stayed, then it is such persons who are
elected whose change report has been accepted would be hit
{4} wp4467-16
hard and affected, without hearing them.
6. Opposing aforesaid submissions, Mr. Kazi, learned
advocate for respondents No.1 to 4 and Mr. Shelke, learned AGP
for respondent No.5 submit that the writ petition is moved at a
premature stage and as a matter of fact it cannot be said that
the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order, for, the
impugned order amply bears it out that the question raised by
the petitioner has not been finally decided by the Joint Charity
Commissioner and the Joint Charity Commissioner in his order
dated 21st March, 2016, which is principal order under challenge
in present writ petition has discussed under paragraphs No.5 and
6, which read thus -
" 5- lnj izdj.kke/;s loZ xSjvtZnkj vn;ki gtj >kysys ulwu
dkgh xSjvtZnkjkaP;k mifLFkrhdfjrk lnjps izdj.k l/;k izyafcr
vkgs- xSjvtZnkj dza- 1 us lnj dkeh vko';d i{kdkjkauk lnj
vihyke/;s i{kdkj Eg.kwu lkehy u dsY;keqGs lnjps vihy
pky.;kl vik= vkgs vlk eqnnk mifLFkrh d#u lnjps vihy
[kkjht dj.;kph fouarh dsyh vkgs- vtZnkjkauh R;kl fojks/k
n'kZfoysyk vkgs- okLrfod ikgrk lnj dkeh dks.krh O;Drh vko';d
i{kdkj vkgs gs ikg.;kdfjrk lnj i{kdkjkP;k gDd lnj
vihyke/;s xaarysys vkgsr dk; o lnjps vihy fudkyh
dk<.;kdfjrk r'kk vko';d i{kdkjkps Eg.k.ks ,sd.ks xjtsps vkgs
dk; ;k nksu ckch ikg.ks vko';d vkgs- ,[kkn;k O;Drhl i{kdkj u
{5} wp4467-16
dsY;kl R;kpk lnj izdj.kkoj dk; ifj.kke gksrks o R;kP;k
xSjgtsjhe/;s lnj izdj.k vafrer% fudkyh dk<rk ;sbZy dk gs
ikg.ks xjtsps vkgs- izLrqr izdj.kkr nk[ky dkxni=kaps voyksdu
dsys vlrk izFke n'kZuh vls fnlwu ;srs dh] dfu'B
izkf/kdj.kkleksjhy cny vtkZrhy loZ i{kdkjkauk ;k dkeh i{kdkj
dsysys vkgs- ijarq R;k cnny vtkZ)kjs ts uohu fo'oLr eaMG
use.;kr vkys vkgs R;k loZ lHkklnkauk ;k dkeh i{kdkj dj.;kr
vkysys ukgh-
6- izLrqr izdj.kke/;s T;k fo'oLrkauk i{kdkj dj.;kr vkysys
ukgh R;kauk ;k vihyke/;s vafre fu.kZ; ns.;kdfjrk i{kdkj dj.ks
vko';d vkgs dk; gs ;k izkf/kdj.;kP;k U;k;hd vf/kdkjkpk foÔ;
vlwu R;kauk [kjks[kj i{kdkj dj.ks xjtsps vkgs dk; o R;kaP;k
xSjgtsjhe/ks lnjps vihy pky.;kl vik= vkgs dk; fdaok R;keqGs
lnj vihykl ck/kk fuekZ.k gkrs dk; ;k ckch vafre fu.kZ;kP;k osGh
fopkjkr ?ks.ks ;ksX; gks.kkj vkgs- lnj vihykrhy vafre ;qDrhokn
,sdY;kuarj o miyC/k nLrkapk fopkj d:u vko';d i{kdkjkapk
eqnnk vafrer% fudkyh dk<rk ;sm 'kdrks- R;keqGs ln;fLFkrhyk
lnjP;k vtkZoj dks.krkgh vafre fu.kZ; u djrk lnjpk eqnnk
[kqyk Bsowu R;kckcr vafre U;k;fu.kZ;kP;k osGh mgkiksg dsyh tkbZy-
lcc izLrqrpk vtZ izyafcr Bsowu lnjps izdj.k iq<s pkyfo.;kr ;sr
vkgs-"
7. Having regard to aforesaid, nature of the impugned order
is interlocutory and the point sought to be raised by the
petitioner in the present petition does not appear to have been
{6} wp4467-16
finally concluded by the Joint Charity Commissioner.
8. As far as other grounds with regard to non hearing of
persons who are not before the Joint Charity Commissioner in
appeal, is concerned, it is for such persons to make proper
movement. In such a case, the Joint Charity Commissioner may
pass appropriate orders in accordance with the facts and law.
9. In my estimate, it is not a case wherein interference is
called for under a writ petition. The writ petition, as such, is not
being entertained and is dismissed leaving it open, however, for
the petitioner to take up the ground / point at appropriate stage.
Rule stands discharged.
[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.]
drp/wp4467-16
