Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sanket Janardan Bhase, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 8 April 2022 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Greater Mumbai Region. The impugned order rejected the petitioner's application (Exh.38) seeking permission to lead oral evidence in support of his application under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (MPT Act). The petitioner claimed to be a person having interest as defined under Section 2(10) of the MPT Act and sought to be joined as a party in proceedings concerning Change Report No. 1803/2011 filed by Respondent No.3, Zulkarin Dabia, for addition of his name as trustee of Respondent No.2 Trust, Kokan Gyanpeeth. The petitioner contended that no decision had been taken on the change report since 2011, that no elections had been held in the trust for over 20 years, and that the trust had become defunct with only two trustees remaining. He argued that he should be permitted to lead oral evidence to support his case. The Assistant Charity Commissioner rejected the application, leading to the present petition. The High Court examined the scope of Section 73A of the MPT Act and held that the provision only allows a person having interest to be joined as a party and to make written submissions; it does not confer a right to lead oral evidence. The court noted that the Charity Commissioner has discretion to permit oral evidence if necessary, but no automatic right exists. The court found no error in the impugned order and dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner free to pursue other remedies if aggrieved by the change report proceedings.
Headnote
A) Charity Law - Right to Lead Oral Evidence - Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 - The petitioner sought to lead oral evidence in support of his application under Section 73A for being joined as a party in change report proceedings. The Assistant Charity Commissioner rejected the application. The High Court held that Section 73A does not confer a right to lead oral evidence; it only permits joinder and filing of written submissions. The court found no error in the impugned order and dismissed the petition. (Paras 1-10) B) Charity Law - Change Report Proceedings - Delay and Defunct Trust Allegations - The petitioner alleged that the trust had become defunct due to lack of elections for over 20 years and only two trustees remaining. However, the court did not address these merits as the only issue was the right to lead oral evidence. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a person having interest under Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 has a right to lead oral evidence in support of his application for joinder in proceedings before the Charity Commissioner.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the impugned order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner rejecting the application to lead oral evidence was correct and did not warrant interference. The court clarified that Section 73A only permits joinder and written submissions, not oral evidence.
Law Points
- Section 73A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act
- 1950 does not confer a right to lead oral evidence
- it only permits a person having interest to be joined as a party and to make written submissions. The Charity Commissioner has discretion to allow oral evidence if necessary
- but no automatic right exists.
