Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 4900 Bom
Judgement Date : 21 July, 2017
2107WP3126.15-Judgment 1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3126 OF 2015
PETITIONERS :- 1) Shri Shankarrao Ganpatrao Gaikawad, Aged
about 72 years, Occu : Profession, R/o Post
Kondhali, Tahsil Katol, Distt. Nagpur.
2) Shri Ajabrao Anandrao Kale, Aged about 75
years, R/o at Saoli (Bk), Post Kalmeshwar,
Distt. Nagpur.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1) Joint Charity Commissioner, Civil Lines,
Nagpur.
2) Gulabrao Gabaji Giradkar, Aged about 73
years, Occu : business, R/o Ashok Chowk,
Saraipeth Umred Road, Nagpur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.M.V.Masodkar, counsel for the petitioners.
Mr.K.L.Dharmadhikari, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent No.1.
Mr.S.D.Abhyankar, counsel for the respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE
, JJ.
DATED : 21.07.2017
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the
judgment of the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur dated 18/04/2015
directing the petitioners not to interfere in the administration of the
trust and the educational institution run by the executive committee.
2107WP3126.15-Judgment 2/2
When this writ petition was filed, the change report filed
by the respondent No.2 was not accepted and was pending and since
the petitioners claim to be the president and treasurer, we had stayed
the order of the Joint Charity Commissioner dated 18/04/2015, during
the pendency of the writ petition.
It is now informed to this court that the change report
filed by the respondent No.2 was rejected by the Assistant Charity
Commissioner and the appeal filed by the respondent No.2 against the
same is allowed. If that is so, the petitioners would not continue to be
the president and the treasurer, as they are not elected as per the
change report that is now accepted by the appellate authority.
In view of the change in circumstances, the cause for filing
the writ petition is rendered infructuous and the same is liable to be
disposed of as such. The petitioners are free to take up appropriate
proceedings if they are aggrieved by the order of the appellate authority
accepting the change report filed by the respondent No.2.
Hence, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to
costs. Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!