1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5422 OF 2009 1] Shri Jaganath S/o Mahadu Walhekar, Age 45 years, Occu. Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 2] Smt. Ranjana W/o Nandu Walhekar, Age 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. 3] Shri Khandu S/o Maruti Wahekar, Age 38 years, Occu. Service & Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. 4] Shri Suresh S/o Satwa Walhekar, Age 35 years, Occu. Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. 5] Shri Karbhari S/o Satwa Walhekar, Age 25 years, Occu. Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. 6] Shri Dattu S/o Mahadu Walhekar, Age 52 years, Occu. Occu. & Agriculture, r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. 7] Shri Nandu S/o Yadav Walhekar, Age 39 years, Occu. Service & Agriculture R/o At Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 8] Smt. Dhrupadabai Rambhau Walhekar, Age 55 years, Occu. Agriculture, R/o At Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 9] Shri Satwa S/o Yadav Walhekar, Age 52years, Occu. Agriculture, 2 r/o at Post Shekata, Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad. ....Petitioners. Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra; Through Charity Commissioner, Varli; Mumbai; (Copy to be served on Assistant Government Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. 2] The State of Maharashtra, Through Assistant Charity Commissoner, Aurangabad. (Copy to be Serviced on Assistant Government Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad.) 3] Appasaheb Ganpatrao Khandagale, Age Major, Occu. R/o at post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 4] Shri Sandip Ambadas Khandagale, Age Major, Occu. R/o at post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 5] Shri Sampatrao S Raosaheb Khandagale, Age Major, Occu. R/o at post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 6] Shri Santosh Bhausaheb Khandagale, Age Major, Occu. R/o at post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. 7] Shri Dilip Ambadas Khandagale, Age Major, Occu. R/o at post Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. ....Respondents. 3 Smt. Deepali Jape Ansingkar , Advocate for the petitioners. Shri. T.S. Lodhe, AGP, for respondent / State. Shri R.J. Godbole, Advocate for respondent Nos. 3,4,6 & 7. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 22th June 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. This Writ Petition challenges the order dated 24/06/2009 passed by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, Aurangabad region, Aurangabad, rejecting application for registration of the Trust i.e. Shri Khandoba Maharaj Sansthan, Shekata, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad, registered as inquiry No. 1794 of 2008. The application has been rejected on the ground that in respect of the said trust the application for registration is pending which is inquiry No. 837 of 2007. The present petitioner has filed objection to the said application for registration. The evidence is going on in the said proceedings. Therefore, it was found that the instant application filed at belated stage cannot be entertained. 2. The learned counsel Smt. Deepali Jape Ansingkar appearing for the petitioner has urged that the application No. 1794 of 2008 has been filed for the registration of the trust i.e. Shri Khandoba Maharaj Sansthan. She does not dispute that for the registration of the said trust, already an application has been filed in inquiry No. 837 of 4 2007, which is pending and the present petitioner has filed objection to the same. She submits that the publication of notice in the instant application was made and as per the Rule 7-A of the Rules framed under Bombay Public Trust Act, objection was required to be filed within period of 30 days same has not be filed any of the respondents within stipulated period and hence according to her Assistant Charity Commissioner ought to have proceeded with inquiry No. 1794 of 2008. It seems that the petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3,4,6 & 7 are interested in registration of the said trust. However, apprehension of the petitioner is that if the trust is registered on the basis of the application inquiry No. 837 of 2007 filed by the concerned respondents., then, they will be put in the management of the Trust. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioners are managing the affairs of the said trust and they will be ousted from the management of the trust. 3. The apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not substantiated. In fact, the question as to who shall be put in the management of the trust, will be decided by the Assistant Charity Commissioner after the trust is registered and while preparing the scheme. It shall be open for the Assistant Charity Commissioner to take into consideration the objection raised by the petitioner and also for inclusion the name of the petitioner as Trustee of the said Trust. The question of the registration of the trust is different than the question of management of the trust. 5 4. In that view , there is no substance in the petiton, the same is dismissed. It is however, made it clear that the objection raised by the petitioners shall be considered by the Assistant Charity Commissioner in the inquiry No. 837 of 2007 for inclusion of their names as trustees on its own merits. Similarly the claim of the respondent Nod. 3,4,5,6 & 7 shall also be considered on its own merits. No. order as to costs. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J. ] SDM* 5422.09