1 (WP 10430 of 2009) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10430 OF 2009 Ramchandra Bapu Bakade & Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. Baban Kisan Sapkal & Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr. Dilip Bodake for Petitioners Mr.S.V. Sadavarte & Mr. P.P. Bhalbhar for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. A.I. Patel -AGP for Respondent No.3 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 25TH JANUARY, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. 2. The Petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Satara Division, who by his order dated 23.10.2009 was pleased to dismiss the application filed by the Petitioners for specific directions under section 41A of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2 (WP 10430 of 2009) said Act”). 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Petitioners filed the said application under section 41A of the said Act alleging that the Respondents are in possession of the property of the Trust illegally and they have put-in their lock on the property belonging to the Trust. It is submitted that the Assistant Charity Commissioner has erred in holding that the directions as sought by the Petitioners in the application cannot be granted under section 41A of the said Act. He invited my attention to the impugned order. 4. In my view, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner. The directions under section 41A can be given by the Assistant Charity Commissioner only to a trustee or any person connected therewith. According to the Petitioners, the Respondents are trespassers and are 3 (WP 10430 of 2009) not trustees of the property. Perusal of section 41A clearly discloses that directions under section 41A of the said Act can be given by the Assistant Charity Commissioner to the two categories of the persons (i) trustee (ii) those who are connected to the Trust. In the present case, admittedly, the Respondents are neither the trustees nor connected with the trust. Therefore, it is not possible to interfere with the impugned order. 5. Needless to state that the Petitioners may file an appropriate proceeding for seeking redressal of their grievance. Writ petition is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)