1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION No. 974/2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 791/2010. Purushottam Tukaram Tidke and another -: versus :- Rajeshwar Kisan Dongre and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : APRIL 27, 2010. As the matter is yet to be admitted, application is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out by 03.05.2010. ---------- Heard Shri Amol Mardikar, learned counsel for petitioners, Shri A. Sambre, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 6 and 8 and Shri Shashikant Borkar, learned counsel for Intervenors. Learned counsel for Petitioners contend that petitioners are continuing since 1999 and as per the earlier interim order they have conducted General Body in which elections has been held. He points out that the elections have been held in 2003 and 2008 and Change Reports are accordingly submitted. Learned counsel is however, not in a 2 position to point out as to what has happened to those change reports and its stage now. I am therefore, satisfied that the petitioners are not in a position to look after the affairs of the Trust and hence in this situation the directions given by the District Judge-2, as interim measure do not causes any prejudice to the petitioners. By those directions the District Judge-2, Nagpur has pointed out the availability of Section 41-A of the Bombay Public Trust Act for proper administration and management of the Trust. It is therefore, clear that while passing further orders if any, under section 41-A, the petitioner and all concerned will have to be heard by the Assistant Charity Commissioner. In this situation, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.