sk 1 wp7035.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.7035 OF 2011 Shri Laxmikant Raghunath Desai : Petitioner V/s. The Honourable Charity Commissioner & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.A.V.Anturkar i/b. Mr.Sugandh Deshmukh for the petitioner. Mr.V.S.Gokhale, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent nos.1 & 2. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 05, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the respondent nos.1 & 2. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is a judgement delivered by the learned single Judge of this Court at Aurangabad Bench in Lahudas Sambhaji Karad v. The State of Maharashtra and others, reported in 1994 (1) Bom.C.R. 103, wherein it is held that the Charity Commissioner has no jurisdiction to entertain a dispute relating to the validity of membership list. It is further observed sk 2 wp7035.11 that the only remedy available in such situation will be to raise objection in change report in an inquiry contemplated under section 22 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that because of the observations made by the learned single Judge, particularly in paragraph 25 of the judgement, the petitioner will not be able to file a civil suit challenging the election and the only remedy available to the petitioner would be to file an objection under section 22 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. It is contended that considering the scheme of section 22, the observations made by the learned single Judge are not sustainable in law and are likely to come in the way of the petitioner in filing a civil suit challenging the election of the respondent no.3 society. It is, therefore, prayed that the observations made by the learned single Judge do not take into its sweep the issue involved in the present Writ Petition pertaining to the voters’ list. 3. We have considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel and perused the decision of the learned single Judge. At the outset, we would like to express that what will happen in case the petitioner files a civil suit cannot be anticipated at this stage by this Court. It is always open for the petitioner to contend before the civil Court whether the judgement of the learned single Judge is applicable or not to sk 3 wp7035.11 the facts of the case and it is also open for the learned civil Court to consider these aspects and record its finding. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the finding recorded by the civil Court on this issue, it is always open for the petitioner to undertake appropriate remedy available in law against such order passed by the civil Court. 4. In the circumstances, no case is made out for showing indulgence. Writ Petition is dismissed. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (R.Y. GANOO,J.)