24-WP-3684-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3684 OF 2026 Rajesh Hiralal Bharati ...Petitioner Versus The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ---------- Mr. Sarthak Utangale i/b Utangale & Co. for Petitioner. Ms Madhura Deshmukh for State/Respondent No.1. ----------- CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 18th AUGUST 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 11th June 2026 passed by the Learned Charity Commissioner, whereby an application preferred by the Petitioner under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950 came to be rejected. 3. By the said application, the Petitioner sought impleadment as a party in Application No.102 of 2024 filed under Section 36(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the said main Application No.102 of 2024 was eventually dismissed by the Learned Meera Jadhav 1/2 MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Digitally signed by MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Date: 2026.08.20 16:10:08 +0530 24-WP-3684-26.DOC Charity Commissioner. However, the Petitioner is aggrieved by certain observations made in the impugned order. 5. Evidently, the intervention was sought, under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950, in the substantive proceedings under Section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950, being Application No.102 of 2024, which eventually came to be dismissed. 6. It would thus be suffice to clarify that the observations contained in the impugned order shall be confined to the determination of the question as to whether the Applicant /Petitioner was to be permitted to intervene in the said proceeding. Since the main proceeding has already been disposed of, nothing survives for consideration in the present Petition. 7. Thus, subject to the aforesaid clarification, the Petition stands disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] Meera Jadhav 2/2