1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3643 OF 2008. Shyambabu Sampatrao Kamble Vs. Nilkanth Bapurao Bujade & Ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A. P. Thakre Adv. for petitioner. Shri V. K. Umre Adv. for R-1 to 6. Smt. Taiwade AGP for R-7. CORAM: J. H. BHATIA, J. DATED: 16 MARCH, 2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. Perused the impugned order. Record reveals that the present petitioner and respondents 1 to 6 as well as two more persons namely Shashikala Kamble and Narendra Rahate were the Members of the Priyadarshini Shikshak Prasarak Mandal a Public Trust. Respondents 1 to 6 vide Enquiry Case No. 05 of 2007 under Section 2 41-A against the present petitioner and other two who claimed to be the Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer respectively of the trust and sought certain directions against them. After hearing all the parties the Assistant Charity Commissioner Chandrapur by the impugned order dated 17.12.2007 observed that prayers made in the said applications were seeking a prohibitory order which cannot be issued under Section 41-A of the Bombay Public Trust Act and only directions can be given for proper administration. Assistant Charity Commissioner also noted that the Change Report has been accepted and names of the applicants that is present respondents 1 to 6, are already reflected in Schedule I and therefore they are entitled to work and manage affairs of the trust. Admittedly in view of the directions given by the Assistant Charity Commissioner on 03.11.2006 in Enquiry No. 03/06 3 elections were held and Change Report was submitted. Change Report is already accepted. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner that Change Report has been challenged before the Joint Charity Commissioner and that revision is still pending. However no stay has been granted. In view of this it is clear that the persons, who are in the management as per said Change Report, are entitled to run the management. Assistant Charity Commissioner by the impugned order, did not give any direction against the present petitioner and only observed that applicants whose names are there as per the Change Reports are entitled to manage the affairs of the trust. Thus practically no order has been passed in the enquiry case No. 5 of 2007. The petitioner may have grievance against the acceptance of the change report but their revision application is pending 4 before the Joint Charity /Commissioner. That grievance is the subject matter of the present petition. In view of the above I find no merit in the present petition. In the result petition stands dismissed. JUDGE svk