*1* wp.5078.11.927.sxw kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5078 OF 2011 Nanasaheb Kore Charitable Trust. ..Petitioner -Versus- Joint Charity Commissioner. ..Respondent .......... Mr.S.S.Patwardhan, for the Petitioner. Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP, for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 02nd August, 2011. P.C.: 1 Heard both sides. Perused the impugned order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune who is incharge Joint Charity Commissioner of Kolhapur Region, Kolhapur. By the impugned order dated 23.02.2011 the Petitioner Trust’s application under Section 36(1) (a) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 seeking sanction for sale of its property which is situated on the outskirts of Paragaon, Taluka : Hatkanangale, District : Kolhapur, has been rejected. The land admeasures 102 acres and is in Hatkanangale Taluka. The Joint Charity Commissioner found some substance in the application to the extent that the sale is in the interest of the Trust, but proceeded to reject the application on the ground that the price offered is not adequate. 2 While it is true that the bidders are not before this Court, but the Trust complains that the offer was given by the highest bidder in two successive rounds. This is the second time that the application is made seeking sanction for sale of the property. The learned counsel appearing *2* wp.5078.11.927.sxw for the Petitioner states that if there was any doubt about the price offered by the bidders and if the Joint Charity Commissioner was of the opinion that there is much difference between the prices offered and actual market price, then, he should have called for specific information from the office of the Sub Registrar within the vicinity or from the Special Land Acquisition Officer/ Deputy Collector of the district. He should have looked at reports of the said authorities, which reports would have assisted him and the same ought to be placed before the bidders to inquire as to whether there is possibility of the bids being further revised. This course was not adopted by the Joint Charity Commissioner and he straightway rejected the application, which conclusion in the given facts and circumstances, is not sustainable. 3 In the light of the fact that the application has been rejected without finding as to whether, the price offered is adequate or not in the aforesaid terms, the order dated 23.02.2011 is quashed and set aside. The application preferred by the Petitioner bearing No.42/2010 will now be reheard by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur in the above terms and he should consider the request for sanction of sale of the Trust’s property as expeditiously as possible within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)