AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Mohan B. Turankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.P.Pendke, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent/State.
The petitioner is a Trustee of the Maharashtra Rural Education Society, Lakhandur, District Bhandara, and the son of original appellant late Mr. Krushna Taliram Khobragade. The original appellant had challenged the order dated 21.02.2014 passed in Change Report No.597/2011 by preferring Appeal No. 06 of 2014 under Section 70 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.
During the pendency of appeal, the original appellant expired on 23.04.2021. Following, resolution dated 18.07.2021 passed by the remaining trustees thereby authorizing the present petitioner to represent the Trust. Thereafter, he filed an application below Exhibit 14 to substitute himself in place of the deceased. The learned Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Nagpur, rejected this application on 13.05.2024 primarily because the death certificate of the deceased appellant had not been filed.
Thereafter, on 30.05.2024, the petitioner filed another application below Exhibit 16, producing the death certificate and once again seeking substitution of his name as appellant in place of the deceased. This application too was rejected by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Nagpur, by order dated 26.06.2024, on the reasoning that since the earlier application below Exhibit 14 had already been rejected, the principle of res judicata would apply and the fresh application was not maintainable. The petitioner further moved application at Exhibit-19 to review the order as the respondent authority has jurisdiction to review the same but the same was again dismissed vide order dated 21.08.2024
Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner challenged the order dated 26.06.2024 in this petition, along with the order dated 21.08.2024 below Exhibit-19 (rejecting recall/review) and the consequential order dated 21.08.2024, whereby Appeal No. 06 of 2014 was dismissed.
It is relevant to note that a similar issue between the same parties has been considered by this Court in Writ Petition bearing No.509 of 2026 and Writ Petition bearing No.457 of 2026, wherein vide order dated 24.07.2026 in both petitions, this Court held that rejection of an earlier application for substitution solely for non-production of the death certificate does not amount to an adjudication on merits, and therefore the principle of res judicata cannot be invoked. The legal position thus stands settled between the parties on this aspect.
Having perused the impugned orders, it is evident that the application below Exhibit-16 was rejected by erroneously invoking the principle of res judicata based on the prior dismissal of Exhibit-14. However, since the earlier application was rejected in limine solely for non-production of the death certificate and not on merits, it does not amount to a substantive adjudication, thereby rendering the principle of res judicata entirely inapplicable to the present facts.
In view of the above, the reasoning adopted by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Nagpur, while rejecting the application below Exhibit 16 cannot be sustained. The impugned order is therefore liable to be quashed and set aside.
Accordingly, the order dated 26.06.2024 passed below Exhibit-16 in Appeal No.32 of 2011 by the Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Nagpur, is hereby quashed and set aside.
The application below Exhibit-16 stands revived and is remanded to the respondent-Joint Charity Commissioner-II, Nagpur, for fresh adjudication on its own merits, without applying the principle of res judicata, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of this order.
The consequential order dated 21.08.2024 is also hereby quashed and set aside.
Needless to mention that all contentions raised in the present petition are kept open.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.