SMT. SUDHA BAI Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order Annexure P/13 dated 19.12.2017 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer-Cum-Registrar, Public Trusts, District Burhanpur in Case No.4B/113/2006-2007, this petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the application filed by the petitioners under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter shall be referred to as ''C.P.C'') was rejected by the Registrar, Public Trusts and being dissatisfied with the order dated 5.7.2007, in a previous round of litigation, Writ Petition No.10357/2007 was filed by the petitioners, which was disposed of vide order dated 12.5.2015 directing the Registrar, Public Trusts to consider and decide the application of the petitioners in accordance with law by passing a speaking order. On production of copy of the said order, he has directed to the respondent No.2 to take appropriate steps and accordingly an application was filed by the respondent No.2 to join the petitioners as party to the proceedings but without deciding the said application, the Registrar, Public Trusts vide order Annexure P/13 dated 19.12.2017 has finally decided the same filed by the respondent No.2 with respect to the registration of a public trust.

(3.) It is urged by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been deprived from opportunity of hearing despite an order of this Court. The petitioners are owners of the property and it is not a registered public trust infact it may be a trust of the private property, therefore, the petitioners deserve an opportunity of hearing. In such circumstances, passing the order impugned dated 19.12.2017 by the Registrar, Public Trusts without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners is liable to be set aside.