YASHWANT AMRATLAL THAKKAR Vs. CHARITY COMMISSIONER GUJARAT STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr.B.T. Rao for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Vishal T. Patel for respondent No.2 caveator.

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner referred the averments made in the memo of the petition and, thereafter, pointed out that respondent No.2 Trust approached respondent No.1 by filing Application No.36/57/2019 under Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 ('the Act' for short) seeking permission for selling the agricultural land of old tenure bearing Survey No.232/1 admeuasirng 2125 sq. meters situated at Mouje Ognaj, Taluka Ghatlodiya, Dist.: Ahmedabad. The upset price of the said land has been fixed at Rs.67,00,000/­. Pursuant to the said application, respondent No.1 passed an order and directed respondent No.2 Trust to give public advertisement in the newspaper in the approved format. The said advertisement was published in the concerned newspaper on 24.09.2019. It is submitted that pursuant to the said advertisement, the petitioner participated in the said process and deposited Rs.16,75,000/­ being 25% of the offered price fixed by the office of respondent No.1. Necessary resolution was passed by the Trust pursuant to the offer received by the petitioner on 24.10.2019. The petitioner gave an offer of Rs.2,76,00,000/­. It is further submitted that in the order passed by respondent No.1, it has been specifically stated that there is no dispute with regard to the property in question of respondent No.2 Trust and the property is having clear and marketable title and there is no injunction of any Court. Permission was thereafter granted by respondent No.1 on certain terms and conditions. The said order was passed on 22.10.2019. Learned advocate has referred the said order, a copy of which is placed on record at Page­33 of the compilation.

(3.) On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Vishal T. Patel appearing for respondent No.2 caveator has opposed this petition and at the outset, contended that this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India itself is not maintainable. It is further submitted that the trustees of respondent No.2 Trust are not joined as parties and, therefore, there is a non­joinder of parties and on this ground also, this petition may not be entertained.