-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL NO. 64/2009 ( Sk. Rahim Sk. Gulab -versus- Shri Najibur ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or Directions Court's or Judge's Orders. And Registrar's Orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : MARCH 2, 2009. Heard Advocate Shri M.A. Vaishnav, for appellant, Advocate Shri J.T. Gilda, for respondent no.1 and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.2. The contention is that in place of reporting Trustee his son could not have been permitted to be substituted, as the said son was already on record before the Assistant Charity Commissioner. Support is being taken from the provisions of Section 73-A of the Bombay Public Trust Act to urge that when a person is not available on record and applies for intervention, then only the course as adopted is permitted in law. Advocate Shri Gilda, for respondent no.1 points out that the reporting trustee was Secretary and father of the present respondent no.1 who has been allowed to be substituted. He further states that -2- respondent is also a Trustee whose name appears in Schedule-I. After hearing the parties and after going through the impugned order, though I find that the conclusions about maintainability of revision challenging order of Assistant Charity Commissioner is contrary to the judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Mukesh Tirpude .vrs. Wamanrao Kmobade (2008 [4] Mh.L.J. 562), still as the respondent no.1 has only been substituted for the purpose of prosecuting the change report further and in view of the subsequent developments in the matter, no substantial questions of law arise in the matter. Second Appeal is therefore dismissed. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.