1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Civil Application No.9132 Of 2008 In First Appeal No.2000 OF 2009 Shiwaji Tanaji Bhavsar ... Applicant. Versus The Joint Charity Commissioner Nashik & Others. ... Respondents. -------- Smt. Anjali Bajpai-Dube, Advocate for the applicant. Shri. S.V. Gangapurwala, Advocate holding for Shri. D.S. Bagul, for respondnet No.2. -------- CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATE: 3rd FEBRUARY 2010 PER COURT : 1) The appellant has presented the instant application seeking stay of the judgment and order passed by the First Ad-hoc Additional District Judge Dhule confirming the 2 order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nashik Region, Nashik in Trust Appeal No.10/2004. The applicant has also in the alternate prayed for appointment of Court Receiver to conduct the administration of the Trust as well as he is seeking a restraint order against the trustees administering the Trust from conduct the affairs. 2) Heard arguments of the respective counsel appearing for the parties. 3) The issue arising in the appeal is in respect of acceptance of resignation of the appellant and validity thereof. The learned Joint Charity Commissioner while allowing the appeal has accepted the contentions raised by the respondents that, the appellant, applicant herein, has tendered resignation and the same is validly accepted. The order passed by the 3 Joint Charity Commissioner, Nashik Region, Nashik is confirmed by the First Ad-hoc Additional District Judge Dhule in Misc. Civil Appeal No.2 of 2006 on 26-3-2008. It thus transpires that the appellant, applicant herein, is not holding the office at least since 2007 or even prior thereto. In these circumstances, the prayer made by the applicant seeking stay of the impugned order, therefore, cannot be considered and the same stands rejected. 4) The applicant is also seeking a restraint order against the respondents from administering the affairs of the Trust. It is pointed out that there are Section 41-D proceedings initiated against the respondents- Trustees and the charges have also been framed by the Joint Charity Commissioner Nashik. The counsel appearing for the applicant contends 4 that the charges levelled against the Managing Trustees are of quite serious nature and considering the allegations made in the application before the Joint Charity Commissioner, it would not be in the interests of the Trust to permit the respondents to continue to run the affairs of the Trust. There were series of applications moved by the applicant herein before the Charity Authorities putting forth allegations and the applications tendered by the applicant herein have been turned down. It would not be appropriate to go into the merits of controversy which is a matter of consideration before the Charity Commissioner in an inquiry under section 41D of the Act. If the applicant has any serious apprehension as regards administration of the affairs of the Trust by the respondents, the applicant is entitled to approach the Joint Charity Commissioner by 5 invoking provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act and if the applicant choses to tender any such application it would be the domain of the Jt. Charity Commissioner to consider the same in accordance with the provisions of law. Considering the pendency of the proceedings under section 41D of the Bombay Public Trusts Act initiated at the instance of the applicant herein before the Joint Charity Commissioner, the prayer made by the applicant seeking restraint order against the respondents - Managing Trustees does not require any consideration. 5) The application, therefore, stands rejected. (R.M. BORDE, J.) rsl/ ca.9132.08