AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the judgment and order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Amarvati Region, Amarvati, in Appeal No.33 of 2017, whereby, the order dated 08.05.2017 accepting the change report by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, is set-aside.
In the present matter, after going through the record, it is revealed that Shri Maroti Sansthan Trust, Dudhala, Tahsil and District Akola, is a registered public trust bearing Registration No.A-107/Akola. As per the P.T. Register, there were five recorded trustees of the Trust.
The present petitioners filed a change report before the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola, for deleting the names of the two deceased trustees and to include the name of the three as per the Resolution dated 15.04.2017. The said change report was accepted by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola, by his order dated 08.05.2017 in Change Report Inquiry No.694 of 2017.
The respondents challenged the said order of accepting the change report by preferring Appeal No.33 of 2017, before the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati Region, Amravati. It is the submission of the respondents that present petitioners had recorded the names of Trustees of the Trust behind their back. According to them, the proceedings which were filed in respect of change of the trustees of the Trust, due to the death of two recorded trustees namely Tulshiram Vithu Raut and Pralhad Namdeo Dhole, is without holding a proper enquiry and without issuing notices to them. Hence, according to them, the said order is liable to be quash and set aside.
It is pointed out that the learned Charity Commissioner, after considering the submissions of the parties, came across certain manipulated documents, which he has found to be done at the instance of concerned clerk of the Office of the Charity Commissioner. It was noticed by the learned Charity Commissioner, that in respect of the name of the respondent No.1 in Schedule-I of the P.T. Register, was wrongly deleted by the concerned clerk and that the said deletion was not certified by the Superintendent of the Assistant Charity Commissioner. Therefore, the entire change report was held to be illegal.
The learned Charity Commissioner, has recorded following findings in para Nos.6 and 7 of the impugned judgment, which reads as under:-
“6.On perusal of the zerox copy of schedule-I of P.T. Register produced before the learned lower authority at document No.6 filed along with change report it appears that the said copy of the schedule-I was issued under Right to Information Act on 08/03/2017 by the public information officer P.T. Registration office, Akola. In the left side column No.2 of the said copy entry 'C' is mentioned as entry amended vide change report No.533/1983 decided on 30/03/1983. Whereas in column No.3 the entry 'C' is shown as 'sarpanch' in front of the trustee Pralhad Namdeo Dhole by cancelling the word 'panch' written earlier. Thus in the said copy of schedule-I it is shown that vide change report No.533/1983 decided on 30/03/1983 the word 'panch' mentioned in front of the name of trustee Prlhaad Namdeo Dhole was corrected as 'sarpanch' and accordingly the said entry marked as 'C' in column No.2. Surprisingly, on perusal of the certified copy of the schedule-I of P. T. Register filed by the appellants in this appeal along with list Exh.10, the entry 'C' in respect of Trambak Gopal Joshi as 'sarpanch' added as a recorded trustees No.3 but it appears that the said entry was later on score out.
7.The said copy of the schedule-I also shows that vide entry 'D' the entry in respect of change report No.533/1983 decided on 30/07/1983 was taken but later on it was again score out under the signature of concern clerk and it is mentioned that the said entry is wrong entry. Cancellation of that entry is neither verified by the superintendent of P. T. Registration Office, Akola nor certified by the Assistant Charity Commissioner. The appellants have also produced certified copies of the change report bearing inquiry No.532/1983 and inquiry No.533/1983 along with this appeal. Both the change reports were accepted by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola. In inquiry No.532/1983. The name of original recorded trustee Rambhau Ganpat Kale was deleted due to his death on 21/06/1980 and the names of Sitaram Dattuji Kale was added as elected vide resolution dt.24/05/1982. Similarly, the change report No.533/1983 shows that the name of one Trambak Gopal Joshi was deleted as died on 23/06/1983 and name of one Vinayak Bhaurao Kale (present appellant No.1) was added as elected vide resolution dt.29/06/1983. In the same change report one Pralhad Namdeo Dhole was continued as a trustee. The respondent have not any document on record to show that the orders in the said change report are set aside by the appellate authority.”
The learned Charity Commissioner, after recording the above observations, held that the Public Information Officer from P.T.R. Office, Akola, had issued an incorrect copy of Schedule-I, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”) and that the concerned clerk had made some unauthorized deletions in the entries of Schedule-I of P.T.R. Office, Akola. Accordingly, the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner, Akola, has directed to conduct an inquiry as to how the incomplete copy of Schedule-I had been issued by the concerned Public Information Officer. The impugned order, being based upon the said manipulated document, was also quashed and set-aside.
The appellant by way of the present petition, has challenged the said judgment on the ground that the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, by ignoring the provisions of Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short “CPC”) allowed the respondents to file documents on record. In the absence of any evidence led on those documents, the same were relied upon and thereby, the appeal was allowed. As such, procedure adopted by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, in the matter is contrary to settled principles of law, hence, the impugned judgment and order is liable to be quashed and set-aside.
In the present matter, respondents relied upon the certified copy of P.T. Register of the Trust, obtained on 21.07.2017, whereas, petitioners relied upon the copy of P.T. Register obtained under the Act, on 03.02.2017. If both the documents are seen, it is crystal clear that the document supplied to petitioners under the Act, is an incomplete document. The entry amended vide C.R. No.588/1983, decided on 30.03.1983, has been deleted by stating that the same was wrong. But, the entry of deletion was not verified by any Authority, nor there is any mention that the same was deleted by an order of any Authority.
In the light of these circumstances, the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, has rightly invoked his powers in the matter and took serious note of the same. Therefore, looking to the manipulation of documents while supplying the same under the Act, in my opinion, without going into the technical aspect of the matter, learned Joint Charity Commissioner, has rightly decided the appeal.
It is a settled principle of law that the Courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. However, at the same time, the Court is empowered to verify the validity of documents which on the face of record if found to be manipulated. In the present case, the documents i.e. one obtained under the Right to Information Act and another certified copy of P.T. Register of the same Trust, shows different/deleted entries. Therefore, in such case, the learned Charity Commissioner, has rightly exercised the powers. In such cases, the Court cannot shut its eyes where illegality is apparent on the fact of record. Therefore, merely because he did not exercise the powers under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC, to rely such documents, in such peculiar facts and circumstances, cannot be made applicable.
In the present case, admittedly manipulated documents came to the notice of learned Joint Charity Commissioner and therefore, he has initiated action in the matter. As per the settled position of law, it amounts to playing fraud on the Court as well as on the opposite party. Therefore, the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, has rightly quashed and set-aside the order dated 08.05.2017 passed by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Amarvati Region, Amarvati, in Appeal No.33 of 2017. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs.