Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10474 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 553 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jainath Tiwari And 4 Others Respondent :- Sarva Hitkari Dharmarth Aushadhalaya Gomti Sewa Sadan Trust(Presently There Is No Trustee) And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Anurag Shukla AND Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 15840 of 2017 Petitioner :- Jainath Tiwari And Ors Respondent :- Sarva Hitkari Dharmarth Aushadhyalaya Gomti Sewa Sadan And Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Bahadur Singh,Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Anurag Shukla Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Anurag Shukla, learned Counsel for the opposite party. 2. Both the matters arising out of the same lis, as such, they are being decided by means of this common judgment. 3. The proceedings initiated were filed by five persons, who are plaintiffs, under Section 74 of the Indian Trust Act read with Section 92 of the C.P.C. alleging that there were mismanagement of the trust and as such, a prayer was made that on account of vacancy arising in the trust on account of the deaths, the same be filled in terms of the mandate of Section 73 of the Indian Trust Act. 4. During the course of the proceedings, objections were decided against the plaintiffs by means of an order dated 13.02.2017, against which, an application being Matter Under Article 227 No.15840 of 2017 was preferred. Subsequently, a fresh order came to be passed in the said proceedings on 09.08.2024, whereby the objections filed by the respondents were accepted holding that the property in question was entrusted for management to a society which cannot be treated as trust. Challenging the said order, the application being Matter Under Article 227 No.553 of 2025 (leading application) has been preferred. 5. Submission of the Counsel for the petitioners is that as the trustees had died, the application was rightly preferred under Section 74 of the Indian Trust Act read with Section 92 of C.P.C., on which, the orders have been passed. 6. A pointed query was raised to the Counsel for the petitioner as to how the proceedings are maintainable under Indian Trust Act, which is applicable only in respect of the private trusts and not public charitable trust, which are governed under Section 92 of the C.P.C. 7. In response to the said query, my attention was drawn to a document, wherein, the trustees had handed over the property for management to the society and the documents to that effect was recorded and was also registered. 8. From the perusal of the said documents, prima facie, the owners of the said property had initially created a trust and a Dharamshala was being run for public use. Ultimately, it was decided that the management of the said Dharamshala be handed over to a society for its effective running. 9. On plain reading of the said, it cannot be termed as private trusts by any logic. Once there is no private trust created, the provisions of Indian Trust Act would have no applicability. 10. In view thereof, once the provisions of Indian Trust Act itself would not applicable, no application could have been filed under the provisions of Indian Trust Act. 11. In view thereof, without going into the other contentions, no fault can be found in the order dated 13.02.2017, whereby, the objections filed by the petitioners was rejected as well as in the order dated 09.08.2024 passed in R.M. No.8 of 2014, whereby the file was consigned to record. 12. It is clarified that R.M. No.8 of 2014 shall stands consigned to record for all purposes. 13. Both the applications filed under Article 227 are dismissed. The parties would be free to take action as may be advised in accordance with law, if they so desire. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 akverma Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench