1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 5485/2007 (Gunwant Vitthalrao Tule VERSUS The Assistant Charity Commissioner Nagpur & others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Ninawe, counsel for the petitioner. CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : MARCH 5, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 31.07.2007 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur, whereby the application of the petitioner under Section 41-A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act came to be rejected. Considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the provisions of Section 41-A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act as well as the impugned order. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any of the contingencies mentioned under Section 41-A exist for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur under Section 41-A. The order further demonstrates that 2 the respondents have already filed an application for framing appropriate scheme for administration of the trust and appropriate orders in this regard are already passed. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for showing indulgence. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE APTE