WP875-00 (1) agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.875 OF 2000 Bombay City Social Education Committee and Ors .. Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr.B.B.Saraf with Mr.P.J.Thorat i/by Hariani & Co for the petitioner. Mr.G.W.Mattos, A.G.P for respondent-State. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : 7th December 2010. P.C.: . By way of this petition, petitioner No.1 which is a Public Trust challenges the resolution passed by the State Government dated 8th February 2000. By the said resolution the government reconstituted Bombay City Social Education Committee. It is a registered Public Trust capable of taking decision in respect of assets and liabilities of Minister, Education Officer and other officers of the State Government. It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that the first Committee was constituted in 1939 and subsequently from time to time it is reconstituted. It is the case of the petitioners that on 31st March 1994 the Committee was dissolved by WP875-00 (2) Government Resolution and since then the petitioners are managing the affairs on their own without any government aid. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in past the government tried to take over the management and assets of the Trust and the decision was challenged by way of Writ Petition No.2234 of 1994. This Court directed the government to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Subsequently the present resolution which is impugned in this petition is passed. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are not taking any financial aid from the government and are managing the affairs on its own. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the resolution in question be quashed and set aside. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the government has no power to dissolve the Trust by only passing a resolution. It is also submitted that even the proceedings are pending before the Charity Commissioner for the purpose of sanctioning scheme. The learned A.G.P Mr.Mattos in his turn has submitted that there is no substance in the allegations made by the petitioners. According to the learned A.G.P Mr.Mattos the government has all the right to pass appropriate resolution by reconstituting the Committee. In this behalf the learned A.G.P Mr.Mattos tried to rely upon the original position of 1939 when the Committee was constituted. WP875-00 (3) 2 By our earlier order dated 24th November 2010 we granted time to the learned A.G.P to take instructions as to whether it is possible to pass fresh order after hearing the petitioners as the impugned resolution is passed admittedly without hearing the petitioners. The learned A.G.P Mr.Mattos after taking instructions from the Officers who are present in the Court today submit that the State Government has no objection if the direction is given to it to pass fresh order after hearing the petitioners in the subject matter. In view of the same and in view of the fact that the impugned decision is taken without hearing the petitioners, the resolution impugned in this petition is set aside with liberty to the State Government to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioners in connection with the subject matter. The State Government after hearing the petitioners may take appropriate decision in this behalf. The contention of the petitioners whether the State has power to pass such resolution is also kept open. The petition is accordingly allowed by setting aside the resolution passed by the government with liberty to pass fresh order after hearing the petitioners. It is pointed out that before the Charity Commissioner the State Government has preferred a changed report under section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act. Similarly, the petitioners have also moved the scheme application. In case the State Government do not WP875-00 (4) take any fresh decision within a period of four months from today, the Charity Commissioner will be free to proceed with the scheme application submitted by the petitioners. However, it is needless to say that the Charity Commissioner will proceed with the scheme application regarding framing of scheme in accordance with law and after hearing the parties including the State Government. The Charity Commissioner may adjudicate the same preferably within a period of six months thereafter. (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, J) (P.B.Majmudar, J)