SHAILESH J PADH Vs. ASSISTANT CHARITY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 10th December 2015 passed by the respondent no.1-Assistant Charity Commissioner below Exhibit-34 filed by the petitioner herein requesting the Assistant Charity Commissioner to keep present scheme application proceeding in abeyance till disposal of change report No.450 of 2008.

(2.) The petitioner claims to be one of the trustees of Shreeji Education Trust, a Public Charitable Trust which was registered on 8th September 1971 and was established for various charitable purposes. On 3rd June 2008, the respondent no.6 had filed a Change Report No.2450 of 2008. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had not attended any purported meeting of the purported Board of Trustees on 2nd April 2008. The respondent no.6 subsequently withdrew certain change reports on 5th May 2008 by which the names of Vasant Chavan, Rajani Bhavke and Sachin Yadav had been added as Trustees of the Trust which were pending before the Deputy Charity Commissioner. The Deputy Charity Commissioner passed an order on 25th June 2008 accepting the Change Report No.2450 of 2008. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 70 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (for short "the said Act") before the Charity Commissioner inter alia praying for setting aside the order dated 25th June 2008 and for rejection of Change Report No.2450 of 2008.

(3.) The Charity Commissioner passed an order dated 26th February 2009 staying the order passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner on 25th June 2008 till further orders thereby staying the alleged appointment of respondent nos.2 to 5 as Trustees of the Trust. On 16th July 2009, the respondent nos.2 to 7 filed a Scheme Application before the Assistant Charity Commissioner under Section 50A of the said Act inter alia praying for framing a scheme for the management and administration of the Trust in terms of the Draft Scheme submitted by the respondent nos.2 to 7 along with the said application. The petitioner also filed an application for impleadment in the scheme application as a necessary party to the said Scheme application and also filed various objections including the maintainability of the said scheme application at the instance of the respondent nos.2 to 7. The petitioner applied for keeping the said scheme application in abeyance.