AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for both the parties.
The present petition challenges order passed below Exhibit 13 on 28.03.2022 in Inquiry No. 377 of 2021, thereby allowing the intervention of the present respondent No.2 in the pending change report, bearing Inquiry No. 377 of 2021.
I have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. Mr. Vaishnav, learned Counsel for the petitioner takes me through the application filed at Exhibit 13 and submits that except for a bare averment that the father of the applicant was a Secretary of the said Trust, there is no more averment in regard which can be a pointer to the fact that the applicant therein is a person interested as contemplated under the provisions of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act. He also points me the reply filed by the petitioner herein stating in detail that such a vague or bare averment would not ipso facto make the applicant a person interested as contemplated under the said Act.
Ms Bajaj, on the other hand, appearing for the respondent No. 2, even though admits that the application is not happily worded, but points me out the order impugned in the petition, and more particularly paragraph No. 3 thereof, wherein the authority, i.e. the Assistant Charity Commissioner, has elaborately recorded a finding that the applicant, i.e. the respondent No. 2 herein, was a party to the appeals and previous change reports have also been challenged at their behest.
Be that as it may, on the perusal of the application and the order impugned, I am of the considered opinion that an opportunity needs to be granted to the respondent No. 2 to file a detailed application along with supporting material on record.
In that view of the matter, following order is passed:
ORDER
The writ petition is partly allowed.
ii) The order below Exhibit 13 dated 28.03.2022 in Inquiry No. 377/2021, is quashed and set aside with liberty to the respondent No. 2 to file a detailed application for getting himself impleaded before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, and the said authority is directed to decide the said application in accordance with law.
iii) Needless to mention that the Assistant Charity Commissioner would grant proper opportunity to the parties to file such documents/additional material on record, and then decide the application in accordance with law.
iv) At this stage, a request has been made by Ms Bajaj, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2, that since the present matter is of the year 2022, the proceedings before the Assistant Charity Commissioner be expedited.
In that view of the matter, the Assistant Charity Commissioner is directed to decide the said application as expeditiously as possible, and in any case, till 30.11.2026.
With these directions, the petition is partly allowed and disposed of as such.