Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2019 DAILYLAW 2839 (BOM)

KESHAVRAJ MAHARAJ SANSTHAN KARANJA, THROUGH ITS TRUSTEE, SHRI PRASHANT VISHNU AMTE AND OTHERS v. JOINT CHARITY COMMISSIONER, AMRAVATI

WP/3995/2019 · 2026-07-10

Shri Pravin S Patil

body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1                                                  wp3995.19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.  3995/2019 Keshavraj Maharaj Sansthan & Ors. ..VS.. Joint Charity Commissioner ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for the petitioner(s) Ms. T. H. Khan, AGP for the respondent/State CORAM :  Z.A.HAQ, J. DATED  :  18/07/2019 Heard. The   conclusions   of   the   learned   Joint   Charity Commissioner   recorded   in   para   nos.   16   and   17   of   the impugned   order   are   based   on   proper   appreciation   of   the material on  record   and   cannot  be  faulted  with.  The  only grievance which is required to be examined is about refund of the   amount   paid   by   the   petitioner   no.   5   to   the   public trust/trustees. Unfortunately, this aspect was not agitated by the parties before the learned Joint Charity Commissioner when the impugned order came to be passed. Hence,   without   interfering   with   the   impugned order, the petitioner no. 5 is permitted to file fresh application before the learned Joint Charity Commissioner praying for directions to the public trust/trustees to refund the amount paid by it for execution of the sale­deed. It is further clarified that after framing of the scheme as per the directions given by 2                                                  wp3995.19 the   learned   Joint   Charity   Commissioner,   the   incoming trustees   will   be   at   liberty   to   take   appropriate   decision regarding sale of the agricultural land, and if they decide to sell the land, of course they will have to seek permission of the   Joint   Charity   Commissioner   under   Section   36   of   the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. With   the   above   clarifications,   the   petition   is disposed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Ansari