1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7590 OF 2010 1 Laxman s/o Tatyarao More, age: 68 years, Occ: Business & Agril., R/o Omerga, Tq. Omerga, District Osmanabad. 2 Trimbakrao s/o Bhaurao Salunke, age: 78 years, Occ: Agril., R/o Dhanori, Tq. Lohara, District Osmanabad. 3 Vithalrao s/o Krishnaji Patil, age: 75 years, Occ: Agril., R/o Sawalsur, Post Naikchakur, Tq.Omerga, District Osmanabad. Petitioners Versus 1 Shivajirao Shridharrao More, age: 50 years, Occ: Agril., C/o Bharat Shikshan Sanstha Trust, Omerga, Tq. Omerga, District Latur. 2 Bharat Shikshan Sanstha, Omerga, through its President. 3 The Assistant Charity Commissioner, at Osmanabad. Respondents Mr. J.R.Patil, advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Hiraji Gaikwad, advocate for Respondents No.1 & 2. Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent No.3. 2 CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 24 th AUGUST, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 Heard Shri J.R.Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Hiraji Gaikwad, learned Counsel for Respondents No.1 & 2 and Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2 An application tendered by the petitioners seeking their impleadment in the inquiry proceedings bearing No.752/2007 has been turned down by the Assistant Charity Commissioner in view of the order passed on 05.06.2010. It is not necessary to go into the factual controversy raised in the matter. Petitioners herein presented an application under Section 73A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act for their impleadment as party respondents in the inquiry proceedings. It is not controverted that petitioners are the members of the Trust and are entitled to be impleaded as parties. It is also not disputed that the petitioners can be said to be interested persons within the meaning of Section 2(10)(d) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. The only reason given by the Assistant Charity 3 Commissioner for turning down the request is that as a result of impleadment of petitioners, the proceedings are likely to be protracted. It is also recorded by the Assistant Charity Commissioner that the Joint Charity Commissioner as well as High Court have directed expeditious disposal of the inquiry proceedings and if impleadment of the petitioners is permitted, it would not be possible to dispose of the matter within the stipulated time frame. The reasons recorded by the Assistant Charity Commissioner for turning down the application for impleadment is irrelevant and petitioners cannot be debarred from participating in the proceedings merely because directions are issued for expeditious disposal of inquiry proceedings. 3 Learned Counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, states that his clients will not pray for unnecessary adjournments and would cooperate the Assistant Charity Commissioner for expeditious disposal of the inquiry proceedings. 4 In this view of the matter, the petition deserves to be allowed and same is accordingly allowed. The order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner on 05.06.2010 below Exhibit-80 in Inquiry Application No. 752/2007 is quashed and set aside. The application tendered by the 4 petitioners herein, seeking their impleadment in the inquiry proceedings, shall be deemed to have been allowed. 5 Rule is accordingly made absolute. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE adb/wp759010