Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Charity Commissioner's Order in Trust Dispute — Maintainability of Appeal Under Section 72 of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Upheld. Alternate Remedy of Appeal Under Section 72 of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 Available to Petitioner Trust.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: KOLHAPUR
  • 109
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shri Siddheshwar Devasthan Trust, Solapur, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order passed by the Charity Commissioner under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The respondent, Sanjay Bhimashankar Thobde, had filed an application before the Charity Commissioner which was allowed. The Trust, being aggrieved, approached the High Court. The Court noted that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the Act. The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable in view of the availability of an alternate remedy. The Court dismissed the petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate forum within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. The Court also directed that if such an appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall decide the same on its own merits without being influenced by the dismissal of the writ petition.

Headnote

A) Public Trusts - Maintainability of Appeal - Section 72 of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 - The petitioner challenged the order of the Charity Commissioner under Section 72 of the Act. The Court held that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the Act and therefore the writ petition is not maintainable. The Court dismissed the petition with liberty to file an appeal. (Paras 1-5)

B) Writ Jurisdiction - Alternate Remedy - Article 227 of Constitution of India - The Court held that when an alternate remedy is available, the writ petition under Article 227 should not be entertained. The Court dismissed the petition with liberty to file an appeal. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the order of the Charity Commissioner under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 is maintainable when an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the said Act is available.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is granted liberty to file an appeal under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 before the appropriate forum within four weeks from the date of the order. If such an appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall decide the same on its own merits without being influenced by the dismissal of the writ petition.

Law Points

  • Maintainability of appeal under Section 72 of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act
  • 1950
  • Existence of alternate remedy
  • Scope of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (11) 419

Writ Petition No. 11780 of 2025

2025-11-20

2025:BHC-KOL:2567

Shri. Siddheshwar Devasthan Trust, Solapur

Sanjay Bhimashankar Thobde and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging order of Charity Commissioner under Section 72 of Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of the order passed by the Charity Commissioner under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was aggrieved by the order of the Charity Commissioner allowing the application of the respondent.

Previous Decisions

Charity Commissioner passed an order under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 in favor of the respondent.

Issues

Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 is available.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the order of the Charity Commissioner is erroneous and requires interference under Article 227. Respondent argued that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the Act and the writ petition is not maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi

When an alternate remedy of appeal is available under the statute, a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable. The petitioner must exhaust the alternate remedy before approaching the High Court.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to file an appeal.

Procedural History

The Charity Commissioner passed an order under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The petitioner challenged that order by filing a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court. The High Court dismissed the petition on the ground of alternate remedy.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950: Section 72
  • Constitution of India: Article 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeal Against Conviction for Murder and Causing Disappearance of Evidence. The appeal challenges the trial court's reliance on circumstantial evidence and FSL report in convicting the accused under Sections 302 and 201 ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Protected Tenant Status in Bombay Tenancy Act Case. Rights Accrued Under Repealed 1939 Act Survive Repeal Under Section 89(2)(b) of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.