Bombay High Court
Bhausaheb Kisan Naikwadi And Others vs The Joint Charity Commissioner Ii And ... on 30 July, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:20025
1
11361.2024WP+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION No. 11361 OF 2024
1. Mr. Bhausaheb Kisan Naikwadi
Age : 65 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
2. Mr. Sureshrao Maruti Kote
Age : 67 years, Occ : Retired,
R/o Jayanti Apartment, Bibavewadi,
Pune.
3. Mrs. Ranjana Bhausaheb Naikwadi
Age : 55 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. Mrs. Bhakti Sachin Hivarkar
Age : 38 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o 1/101, Lalwani Vastu, Sakorengar,
Vimannagar, Pune.
5. Mr. Girish Bhausaheb Naikwadi
Age : 37 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
..PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The Joint Charity Commissioner-II,
Pune Office of the Joint Charity
Commissioner, Pune Region,
Pune.
2. Mr. Madhukarrao Laxman Navale
Age : 72 years, Occ : Social Worker,
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
3. Mr. Vikram Madhukarrao Navale
Age : 38 years, Occ : Business,
2
11361.2024WP+.odt
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. Mr. Laxman Kashiba Navale
Age : 87 years, Occ : Nil (Senior Citizen),
R/o Navalewadi, Post. Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
5. Dy. Charity Commissioner,
Ahmednagar Division, Ahmednagar.
..RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 11362 OF 2024
1. Mr. Bhausaheb Kisan Naikwadi
Age : 65 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
2. Mr. Sureshrao Maruti Kote,
Age : 67 years, Occ : Retired,
R/o Jayanti Apartment, Bibavewadi,
Pune.
3. Mrs. Ranjana Bhausaheb Naikwadi
Age : 55 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. Mrs. Bhakti Sachin Hivarkar
Age : 38 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o 1/101, Lalwani Vastu, Sakorengar,
Vimannagar, Pune.
5. Mr. Girish Bhausaheb Naikwadi
Age : 37 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
..PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The Joint Charity Commissioner-II,
Pune Office of the Joint Charity
Commissioner, Pune Region,
Pune.
3
11361.2024WP+.odt
2. Mr. Madhukarrao Laxman Navale
Age : 72 years, Occ : Social Worker,
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
3. Mr. Vikram Madhukarrao Navale
Age : 38 years, Occ : Business,
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. Mr. Laxman Kashiba Navale
Age : 87 years, Occ : Nil (Senior Citizen),
R/o Navalewadi, Post. Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
5. Dr. Mrs. Jayshri Rajiv Deshmukh
Age : Major,
Add. Shriramnagar, Dhumalvadi,
Dhamangaon, Aavari Road,
Post. Tal. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
6. Mr. Arun Lakshman Navale
Age : Major,
Add. Radhakunj, Dhamangaon road,
Post. Dist. Ahmednagar.
7. Dr. Mrs. Archana Satish Khatal
Age : Major,
Add-4/A, Shivapurvada, At Post. Shivapur,
Tq. Haveli, Dist. Pune.
8. Mrs. Alphonsa Devsi Palisheri,
Age : Major,
Add-Shriramnagar, Dhumalvadi,
Dhamangaon, Aavari Road,
Post. Tal. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
9. Mr. Bhagwat Lakshman Navale
Age : Major,
Add-Radhakunj, Dhamangaon road,
Post. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
4
11361.2024WP+.odt
10. Mr. Vivek Madhukar Navale
Age : Major,
Add-Aalefata, Vadagon Ananad,
Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune.
11. Dy. Charity Commissioner,
Ahmednagar Division, Ahmednagar.
..RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 11360 OF 2024
1. Mr. Bhausaheb Kisan Naikwadi
Age : 65 years, Occ : Agri.,
R/o At Post. Navalewadi, Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
2. Mr. Sureshrao Maruti Kote,
Age : 67 years, Occ : Retired,
R/o Jayanti Apartment, Bibavewadi,
Pune.
..PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The Joint Charity Commissioner-II,
Pune Office of the Joint Charity
Commissioner, Pune Region,
Pune.
2. Mr. Madhukarrao Laxman Navale
Age : 72 years, Occ : Social Worker,
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
3. Mr. Vikram Madhukarrao Navale
Age : 38 years, Occ : Business,
R/o Radhakunj, Dhamangaon Road,
Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. Mr. Laxman Kashiba Navale
Age : 87 years, Occ : Nil (Senior Citizen),
R/o Navalewadi, Post. Tq. Akole,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
5
11361.2024WP+.odt
5. Dr. Mrs. Jayshri Rajiv Deshmukh
Age : Major,
Add. Shriramnagar, Dhumalvadi,
Dhamangaon, Aavari Road,
Post. Tal. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
6. Mr. Arun Lakshman Navale
Age : Major,
Add. Radhakunj, Dhamangaon road,
Post. Dist. Ahmednagar.
7. Dr. Mrs. Archana Satish Khatal
Age : Major,
Add-4/A, Shivapurvada, At Post. Shivapur,
Tq. Haveli, Dist. Pune.
8. Mrs. Alphonsa Devsi Palisheri,
Age : Major,
Add-Shriramnagar, Dhumalvadi,
Dhamangaon, Aavari Road,
Post. Tal. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
9. Mr. Bhagwat Lakshman Navale
Age : Major,
Add-Radhakunj, Dhamangaon road,
Post. Akole, Dist. Ahmednagar.
10. Mr. Vivek Madhukar Navale
Age : Major,
Add-Aalefata, Vadagon Ananad,
Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune.
11. Dy. Charity Commissioner,
Ahmednagar Division, Ahmednagar.
..RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.Prashant Ramakant Katneshwarkar, Senior Advocate i/b
Mr.Rahil R. Kazi, Advocate for the petitioners in all WP
Mr. Ramesh N. Dhorde, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. V.R. Dhorde
for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in WP No.11361/2024, Respondent
Nos.2 to 10 in WP No.11362/2024 and Respondent Nos.2 to
10 in WP No.11360/2024.
Mr. V.S. Badakh, AGP for the respondent/State.
...
6
11361.2024WP+.odt
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
RESERVED ON : 17th JUNE, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON: 30th JULY, 2025
JUDGMENT :
The present petitions pertain to a trust registered
under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950, named Abhinav
Shikshan Sanstha, Navalewadi (Hereinafter referred to as "the
said trust"). The said trust was registered vide registration
certificate dated 09.04.1992. The controversy pertains to
change reports filed by two rival groups in the trust.
2. Before adverting controversy involved in the
matters, it will be appropriate to briefly summarize the
scheme of the trust. The trust is an educational institution. Its
area of operation is Akole Tahsil in Ahmednagar district. For
the purpose of controversy involved in the matters, clauses 2,
3, 4, 5(d), 10 and 15 will be relevant. Clause (2) deals with
Board of Trustees. The said clause provides that the Board of
Trustees will be the final authority of the Trust. The members
of any other committees do not have the authority to effect
any change in the Board of Trustees. Clause (3) of the scheme
provides for constitution of the Managing Committee for
11361.2024WP+.odt
managing the day today affairs of the trust. It is provided that
this Committee shall compromise of trustees, who are elected
by the trustees amongst themselves. As per clause 10, the
Managing Committee comprises of 9 members including
President(1), Vice President (2), Secretary(1), Joint
Secretaries (2) and Treasurer (1). Clause 10 further provides
that the Board of Trustees by unanimous resolution may
resolve to fill up the posts in the Managing Committee
through regular elections. It is, however, provided that even if
the Managing Committee is to be elected by way of elections,
the office bearers shall be only from the Board of Trustees.
This is also provided under clause 15, which states that the
Managing Committee will be elected by trustees. Clause 15
further provides that if the trustees deem it appropriate,
elections can be held for the Managing Committee and that in
case of such elections each member shall have right to cast
one vote. Clause 16 enables the Board of Trustees to fill up
vacancies in the Managing Committee which may arise on
account of death, resignation, expulsion or otherwise. Apart
from Board of Trustees and Managing Committee, the scheme
provides for constitution of Executive Committees. Such
Executive Committees can be constituted with permission of
11361.2024WP+.odt
the Board of Trustees. The members of the Trust have a right
to cast vote in elections for constitution of such Executive
Committees. There are seven categories of members as per
clause 5 of the scheme.
3. The scheme is unique in the sense that unlike any
other trust, the general body comprising of members of trust is
not the supreme body. Supreme Body is the Board of Trustees.
The office bearers of the Managing Committee are to be
elected by the Board of Trustees from amongst themselves. A
person, who is not a Trustee cannot be member of Managing
Committee. The Managing Committee can be constituted by
elections only if it is so decided by the Board of Trustees.
4. The trust was formed by nine individuals. The
said nine individuals, who formed the trust constituted the
first Board of Trustees and also the Managing Committee. The
petitioner no.1 in Writ Petition No.11361/2024 was founder
treasurer. Likewise, respondent nos.2 to 4 were founder
President and members respectively.
5. It will be pertinent to mention that over a period
of years several disputes have arisen between the trustees. As
11361.2024WP+.odt
a consequence of which, a suit, being Regular Civil Suit
No.406/2022 was filed by the petitioner nos.1 to 3 and 5
against respondent nos.2 to 4 as also petitioner no.4 in Writ
Petition No.11361/2024 seeking an order of mandatory
injunction for handing over the management of the trust to
them on the ground that they were elected on the Managing
Committee of the trust in the election meeting held on
31.03.2022. An application for grant of temporary injunction
was also filed in the said suit seeking relief that respondent
nos.1 to 3 should not create any obstruction in the
management of the trust. The said application for temporary
injunction was rejected by the learned trial court vide order
dated 06.05.2022. The suit is filed in view of the fact that
respondent no.2 had called for a meeting for holding elections
to the Managing Committee.
6. The controversy in the matters revolves around
three change reports i.e. Change Report No.589/2022 filed by
petitioner no.1, Change Report No.831/2022 and Change
Report No.870/2022 filed by respondent no.1. Initially, the
learned Deputy Charity Commissioner had vide common
judgment and order dated 09.01.2024 allowed the Change
11361.2024WP+.odt
Report No.589/2022 and rejected the Change Report
No.831/2022. The learned Deputy Charity Commissioner by
passing separate judgment and order dated 09.01.2024 has
rejected the Change Report No. 870/2022. However, the
learned Joint Charity Commissioner allowed the appeals by
passing separate orders and has approved Change Report
No.870/2022 and Change Report No.831/2022 and rejected
the Change Report No.589/2022. The petitioners have,
therefore, filed present petitions challenging the aforesaid
orders passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner.
7. Since the controversy involved in the matters is
common and it is relating to the same trust, all the three
petitions are decided by this common judgment and order.
Before dealing with merits of the matters, it is necessary to
state that a Change Report can be allowed only if the change
has factually taken place and further if the change is legal.
8. WRIT PETITION NO.11361/2024 :-
(a) This petition arises out of Change Report No.589/2022,
which was initially allowed by the learned Deputy Charity
Commissioner vide order dated 09.01.2024 and rejected by
11361.2024WP+.odt
the learned Joint Charity Commissioner vide judgment dated
11.09.2024 passed in Appeal No.11/2024. The said Change
Report was filed by petitioner no.1 as Reporting Trustee.
Initially, the name of two trustees viz:-, Ramkrushna Namdeo
Navale (Joint Secretary) and Rameshchandra Dhondiba
Khandge (Secretary) were sought to be deleted on account of
their demise. There cannot be a dispute with respect to said
aspect. Petitioner No.1 also sought deletion of name of
respondent no.2 on the ground that in the meeting of Board of
Trustees held on 31.03.2022, new Managing Committee was
constituted as per Resolution No.2 passed in the said meeting.
Apart from this, change was sought with respect to positions
held by two trustees in view of the said election. The
designation of Shri Suresh Kote/petitioner no.2 was sought to
be altered from Vice President to President and that of
petitioner no.1 was sought to be changed from Treasurer to
Secretary. Likewise, the names of petitioner nos.3 and 4 were
sought to be included as Joint Secretary and
Treasurer respectively.
(b) The said Change Report No.589/2022 was filed on
01.04.2022. Notice was issued to respondent no.2 in the said
11361.2024WP+.odt
Change Report as outgoing trustee. Respondent Nos.3 and 4
filed application for intervention, which was allowed by the
learned Deputy Charity Commissioner.
(c) Learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has recorded
that notice for election meeting to be held on 31.03.2022 was
issued on 16.03.2022. It is observed that the said notice was
not disputed by respondent nos.2 to 4. The learned Deputy
Charity Commissioner has accepted the version of petitioner
no.1/Reporting Trustee that after the meeting had
commenced, respondent no.2 realized that majority was not
on his side, and therefore, he left the election meeting
midway. It is observed by the learned Deputy Charity
Commissioner that two out of nine trustees had expired and
out of seven trustees four trustees continued with the meeting.
It is observed that the quorum for meeting is 1/3 rd of the total
strength and as such, four trustees present in the meeting
constituted adequate quorum for holding the meeting. The
learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has, therefore, directed
change as is recorded in the resolution dated 31.03.2022
needs to be recorded. It is also held that the said election was
held in accordance with the scheme of the Trust.
11361.2024WP+.odt
(d) Respondent Nos.2 to 4 filed appeal, being Appeal
No.11/2024 under Section 70 of the Maharashtra Public Trust
Act (Hereinafter referred to as "MPT Act") challenging the
judgment and order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the learned
Deputy Charity Commissioner allowing the Change Report
No.589/2022. The learned Joint Charity Commissioner has
allowed the appeal vide judgment and order dated 11.09.2024
thereby rejecting the Change Report No.589/2022. It is held
that the election meeting dated 31.03.2022 was not issued in
accordance with the Constitution of the Trust, and therefore,
the election meeting was illegal and election held in the said
meeting is liable to be discarded. It is also held that the
meeting was held in the absence of adequate quorum. The
learned Joint Charity Commissioner has observed that there
were serious allegations of fabrication of minutes of meeting
which created doubt as regards validity of the resolutions
passed in the meeting. This finding appears to be recorded on
the basis of discrepancies in the official membership lists and
attendance sheet. However, the learned Joint Charity
Commissioner has not recorded any specific reasons for
arriving at such finding. Sweeping observations are made in
order without referring to any evidence on the basis of which
11361.2024WP+.odt
the observations are made. It is also held that removal of
respondent no.2 as trustee was without following procedural
safeguards under Section 41D of the MPT Act.
9. It is stated that a notice for meeting of the Board
of Trustees was issued on 16.03.2022. The meeting was
scheduled to be held on 31.03.2022. Perusal of the notice
dated 16.03.2022 will indicate that the meeting was called for
the following subjects :-
(i) To read and confirm the minutes of meeting held on
15th March, 2021.
(ii) Regarding the elections of Managing Committee for the
term 2022-2025.
10. Mr. Dhorde, learned senior advocate appearing
for the respondents contends that the meeting was not for
holding elections but only in order to hold discussions with
respect to the elections to the Managing Committee. As
against this, the contention of Mr. Katneshwarkar, senior
advocate for the petitioners is that the notice was for holding
elections. If the interpretation of item no.2 as offered by
Mr.Dhorde is accepted, then Change Report filed by the
11361.2024WP+.odt
petitioners has to be rejected. For important matters such as
election of the trust, it is necessary that a clear notice should
be issued to all the concerned and the notice must clearly
mention election as an agenda item. Important matters such
as election cannot be taken at spur of moment without
appropriate notice of advance to the concerned. However,
even if item no.2 is interpreted to mean that the notice was
issued for holding the elections, as contended by
Mr.Katneshwarkar, the Change Report must fail for the reasons
mentioned hereinafter.
11. Perusal of minutes of meeting dated 31.03.2022
prepared by the petitioners will demonstrate that the meeting
had commenced under Chairmanship of respondent no.2. It is
recorded that when discussion on agenda item nos.1 and 2
commenced, respondent no.2 found that the majority was not
with him, and therefore, he left the meeting along with
respondent nos.3 and 4 without signing the proceeding book.
It is recorded that petitioner no.2 presided over the meeting
thereafter. Perusal of the meeting will demonstrate that the
decision was taken to remove respondent no.2 from the post
of President as also from the post of trustee. Thereafter,
11361.2024WP+.odt
decision was taken to induct petitioner no.3 Ranjana
Naikwadi as trustee. Perusal of resolution further shows that
petitioner nos.1 to 4 were appointed as Secretary, President,
Joint Secretary and Treasurer respectively. It was thereafter
resolved that the vacant post of Vice President, created on
account of appointment of petitioner no.2 as President and
two members will be filled up later on.
12. The removal of respondent no.2 from the post of
President and Trustee is absolutely illegal since the said item
was not on the agenda of the meeting. Even if it is assumed
that the meeting was election meeting and respondent no.2
did not have support of majority for being elected as
President, there cannot be any justification for his expulsion
from the Board of Trustees as a Trustee.
13. No provision is cited enabling the Board of
Trustees or Managing Committee of the Trust to expel or take
a decision to remove respondent no.2 as Trustee from Board
of Trustees. The power of suspension, removal and dismissal
of the Trustee is vested with the Charity Commissioner under
11361.2024WP+.odt
Section 41D of the MPT Act. This power can be exercised by
the Charity Commissioner either on an application of a
Trustee or any person interested in the Trust or on receipt of
report under Section 41B or even suo-motu. Thus the
petitioners as Trustees could have at best made an application
for removal of respondent no.2 to the Charity Commissioner
under Section 41D of the Act. They did not have any power or
authority to remove respondent no.2 as Trustee simply by
passing resolution.
14. The induction of petitioner no.1 as a Trustee is
also illegal because there was no item on the agenda for doing
so. Inducting a person as a Trustee is an important decision
and it is, therefore, necessary that before taking any decision
in this regard all the concerned must be put to notice so that
they can participate in the decision making process. From the
minutes of meeting produced on record by the petitioners, it
appears that after respondent nos.2 to 4 left the meeting,
decision to induct petitioner no.3 as a Trustee was taken by
petitioner nos.1 to 4 and 5. It will be pertinent to mention that
petitioner no.3, who was inducted as Trustee is wife of
petitioner no.1 and mother of petitioner no.5. The induction
11361.2024WP+.odt
of petitioner no.3 as Trustee and her consequent appointment
on the post of Joint Secretary, is therefore illegal.
15. As per the Trust Deed, the Managing Committee
comprises of nine members. Members of the Managing
Committee have to be Trustees. Any person, who is not a
Trustee, is not eligible to be a member of Managing
Committee. Admittedly as on 31.03.2022, there were only
seven Trustees and as such only seven posts of Managing
Committee could be filled up. If a general election to the
Managing Committee was to be held in the meeting dated
31.03.2022, nine persons would have to be elected. However,
nine eligible persons did not even exit since there were only
seven Trustees. It is difficult to interpret agenda item no.2 of
the notice dated 16.03.2022 as an election notice. The
contention of the respondents that the agenda item was for
holding discussion regarding election to be held appears to be
more probable. The change reported vide Change Report
No.589/2022 is not in accordance with the Trust Deed, and
therefore, not a legal and valid change. Change Report
No.589/2022 is therefore, liable to be rejected. Writ Petition
No.11361/2024 is therefore liable to be dismissed.
11361.2024WP+.odt
WRIT PETITION NOS.11362/2024 AND 11360/2024 :-
16. Writ Petition No.11362/2024 pertains to Change
Report No.831/2022, which is filed by respondent no.2 as
Reporting Trustee on 10.05.2022. It is stated that a new Board
of Trustees was constituted in the Annual General Meeting
(AGM) of the members of the trust on 07.05.2022. Names of
nine members, who are stated to be elected as trustees in the
meeting dated 07.05.2022 were sought to be brought on
record in the said Change Report. The said Change Report was
rejected by the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner vide
order dated 09.01.2024. Being aggrieved by the rejection of
the Change Report, respondent nos.2 to 10, who were elected
as trustees filed appeal no.9/2024 before the Joint Charity
Commissioner under Section 70 of the MPT Act. The said
appeal came to be allowed vide judgment dated 11.09.2024
passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner. The
learned Joint Charity Commissioner has observed that the
election meeting was held on 07.05.2022 by issuing proper
notices to all the members and the minutes of the said
meeting were signed by all the trustees, who attended the
meeting. It is observed that substantive evidence was brought
11361.2024WP+.odt
on record to hold that the election was properly conducted. As
regards allegations of irregularities raised by the present
petitioners, it is held that the evidence brought on record did
not suggest any such irregularity. The petitioners have filed
Writ Petition No.11362/2024 challenging the said judgment
passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner.
17. Writ Petition No.11360/2024 arises out of Change
Report No.870/2022 filed by respondent no.2 as reporting
trustee on 23.05.2012. The said Change Report sequel to
Change Report No.831/2022. It is stated that after the new
Board of Trustees was elected in the meeting held on
07.05.2022, the said trustees, elected a new Managing
Committee in the meeting held on 19.05.2022. The learned
Deputy Charity Commissioner rejected this change vide order
dated 09.01.2024 in view of rejection of Change Report
No.831/2022. Respondent Nos.2 to 10 preferred appeal under
Section 70 of the MPT Act, being Appeal No.10/2024
challenging the said order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the
Deputy Charity Commissioner. The said appeal is allowed vide
judgment and order dated 11.09.2024 passed by the learned
Joint Charity Commissioner for the same reasons on the basis
11361.2024WP+.odt
of which Appeal No.9/2024 arising out of Change Report
No.831/2022 came to be allowed.
18. It will be appropriate to first deal with the Change
Report No.831/2022 filed by respondent no.2. As stated
above, this Change Report pertains to elections of trustees
allegedly held in the AGM held on 07.05.2022.
19. With respect to Change Report No.831/2022,
Mr.Katneshwarkar contends that the said election is allegedly
held in the AGM in which the members have allegedly cast
votes for elections of Board of Trustees. Mr. Katneshwarkar
draws attention to clauses 10 and 15 to contend that the
Board of Trustees only is competent to elect the members of
the Managing Committee. He further states that members of
the trust do not have any right to cast votes for elections of
Managing Committee. Relying on clause 2, he contends that
the elections allegedly held on 07.05.2022 with respect to
Board of Trustees and subsequent elections held on
19.05.2022 with respect to Managing Committee are illegal.
11361.2024WP+.odt
20. Per contra, Mr. R.N. Dhorde, learned senior
advocate appearing for the respondents contends that the
General Body of the Trust is supreme body and it has the right
to elect the members of Board of Trustees.
21. The election held by the general body is also
sought to be justified by the learned senior advocate for the
respondents placing reliance on clause 5(d)(2) of the scheme.
The learned senior advocate contends that in view of the said
provision, the members of the trust have a right to cast vote
for electing the members of the Managing Committee. The
contention is liable to be rejected. Perusal of the scheme, will
indicate that there are three bodies contemplated under the
same viz:- the Board of Trustees (clause 2), Managing
Committee (clause 3) and Executive Committees {clause 5(D)
(2)}. Perusal of clauses 3 and 5(D)(2) will demonstrate that
the Managing Committee and Executive Committees are
separate bodies. It is not compulsory to constitute an
Executive Committee. Perusal of clause 5(D)(2) will
demonstrate that an Executive Committee may be constituted
subject to permission by the Board of Trustees. Thus,
Executing Committee is a body which may come in existence
11361.2024WP+.odt
only if the Board of Trustees decides to constitute the same.
Further perusal of the clauses 10 to 17 will demonstrate that
both committees are different and their powers and functions
are also different. Clause 10(D)(2) provides that the members
have right to cast vote for elections of Executive Committee
that may be constituted with approval of the Board of
Trustees. It does not confer right in the members to cast vote
for constitution of Managing Committee. The contention of
the learned senior advocate for the respondents with respect
to right of members to cast vote for constitution of Managing
Committee is therefore rejected.
22. It is undisputed that initial Board of Trustees
comprises of nine persons. Two of them had died. There is no
provision under the scheme which specifically deals with the
manner in which the trustees can be appointed. The trust deed
is silent with respect to number of trustees in the Board of
Trustees. The first board comprised of nine trustees. However,
maximum or minimum number of trustees is not specified.
Since, the Managing Committee comprises of nine members
and the scheme categorically provides that a person cannot be
member of the Managing Committee unless he is a trustee, it
11361.2024WP+.odt
is obvious that the Board of Trustees must comprise of
minimum nine persons. It will also be pertinent to mention
that there is no direct provision prescribing the manner in
which a person can be inducted as trustee or vacancies of the
trustees can be filled up. However, clause 16 provides that
vacancies in the Managing Committee arising out of death,
resignation or expulsion or any other reason can be filled in by
the Board of Trustees. Thus the Board of Trustees has power
to fill up vacancies of managing Committee. As stated above
in order to be a member of the Managing Committee, a person
has to first be a trustee. Since Board of Trustees has power to
appoint a person on the Managing Committee in case of
vacancy, in the considered opinion of this Court, the Board of
Trustees will also have power to appoint a person as trustee,
because unless a person is first appointed as trustee, he cannot
be appointed to fill up vacancy in the Managing Committee.
The power to appoint a person on Managing Committee
includes by implication to appoint such person as a Trustee.
Therefore, the power to fill up vacancies in Board of Trustees
is vested only with members of Board of Trustees.
23. The members, who are not Trustees do not have
11361.2024WP+.odt
this power. Therefore, Change Report No.831/2022, which
pertains to election of Trustees by the members in the AGM
stated to be held on 07.05.2022 is liable to be rejected, in as
much as, the members do not have power or authority to elect
or appoint any person as a Trustee.
24. It is also necessary to refer to clauses 2, 10 and 15
of the Trust Deed. Clause 2 provides that Managing
Committee shall be constituted by members of Board of
Trustees from and amongst themselves. Clauses 10(A) and
15(1) reiterate and confirm the same. However, conjoint
reading of Clauses 10(A) and 15(2) will demonstrate that
Managing Committee can be constituted by holding elections,
if the Board of Trustees takes decision in that regard. It is
provided that if the Managing Committee is to be formed by
election then the members will have a right to cast vote in
such election. However, it further provides that only Trustees
can be elected as members or office bearers of Managing
Committee. It will be pertinent to mention that although, the
members may, subject to decision of Board of Trustees, cast
votes in election of Managing Committee, they do not have
power to appoint any person as a Trustee. However, according
11361.2024WP+.odt
to respondent nos.2 to 4, the members have elected a new
Board of Trustees in the meeting held on 07.05.2022. Since
the members do not have power to elect or appoint any
person as trustee, Change Report No.831/2022 is also not in
accordance with the Trust Deed and is therefore liable to be
declared as illegal.
25. As regards Writ Petition No.11360/2024, the
same arises out of Change Report No.870/2022. It is the
contention of learned advocate for the respondents that Board
of Trustees that was constituted/elected in the meeting on
07.05.2022 elected the Managing Committee in its meeting
held on 19.05.2022. Since the constitution of Board of
Trustees in the meeting/election held on 07.05.2022 is held to
be illegal, the consequent election held by such members for
constitution of Managing Committee will also have to be
declared as illegal.
26. The learned senior advocate Shri Dhorde
contends that since the term of the Managing Committee has
come to an end, the petitions need not be decided on merits
11361.2024WP+.odt
and be disposed of as infructuous. He has placed reliance on
judgment of this Court in the matter of Jagatnarayansingh
Swarupsingh Chithere and others Vs. Swarupsingh Education
Society and another, 1980 Mh.L.J. 372 in support of the
contention.
27. The contention of the learned senior advocate
cannot be accepted in the facts of the present case. The
dispute between the parties is not only with respect to fact of
elections being conducted by rival groups but also with
respect to mode and manner in which the elections are to be
conducted. The respondents contend that the elections of the
Managing Committee are required to be held by elections in
which all the members will have a right to cast vote. As
against this, the contention of the petitioners is that the
members other than trustees do not have right to cast vote.
They contend that the Managing Committee is required to be
elected by the trustees from amongst themselves. This issue
between the parties shall continue to arise between the parties
after successive tenures come to an end after a cycle of three
years. In that view of the matter, the cause in the petitions
cannot be said to be rendered infructuous. The petitions are
11361.2024WP+.odt
therefore decided on merits.
28. In view of the above, Change Report
No.831/2022 is liable to be rejected in as much as it is stated
in the said Change Report that the Board of Trustees was
elected by the general members of the trust in the AGM held
on 07.05.2022. As stated above, the members of the trust,
who are not trustees are not empowered to appoint any
person as the trustee. Writ Petition No.11362/2024, therefore,
needs to be allowed.
29. As regards Writ Petition No.11360/2024, the
same arises out of Change Report No.870/2022. The trustees,
who were elected in the AGM held on 07.05.2022, elected a
Managing Committee in meeting of Board of Trustees held on
19.05.2022. Since the elections of Board of Trustees itself is
illegal, the Managing Committee elected by such Board will
also be illegal, Writ Petition No.11360/2024, therefore, needs
to be allowed.
30. For the reasons recorded above, Writ Petition
No.11361/2024 deserves to be rejected and Writ Petition
11361.2024WP+.odt
Nos.11360/2024 and 11362/2024 deserve to be allowed.
Hence the following order :-
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition No.11361/2024 stands rejected. Change
Report No.589/2022 decided by the Deputy Charity
Commissioner, Ahmednagar vide order dated 09.01.2024,
stands rejected.
(ii)Writ Petition No.11360/2024 and Writ Petition
No.11362/2024 are allowed.
(iii) The judgments and orders dated 11.09.2024 passed by
the Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Pune in Appeal
Nos.10/2024 and 9/2024 are quashed and set aside. Change
Report Nos.870/2022 and 831/2022 stand rejected.
31. Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
[ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.]
sga/2025
