1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2739 OF 2011 (Gopichand s/o Ratiramji Maraskolhe and others vs. Dinesh s/o Baburao Madavi and others) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2740 OF 2011 (Ku. Jayshri Raghunathji Maraskolhe and others vs. Purushottam Govinda Warkade and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. WRIT PETITION NO.2739 OF 2011 Shri A.M. Gordey, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri P. Gode, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for the respondent no.1. Shri A.Z. Jibhkate, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Shri Abhyankar, Advocate for the respondent nos.4 and 5. Shri P.V. Bhoyar, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 7 and 8. WRIT PETITION NO.2740 OF 2011 Shri A.M. Gordey, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri P. Gode, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri A.Z. Jibhkate, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Shri Abhyankar, Advocate for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for the respondent no.5. Shri P.V. Bhoyar, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos. 7 and 8. -------- CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATED : JULY 4 , 2011 By the above petitions, the petitioners 2 take exception to the order dated 29/4/2011 passed by the learned District Judge-1, Bhandara whereby application (Exh.5) in M.J.C. Nos.103/10 and 104/10 are rejected. The change report proceedings bearing Nos.1325/2006 and 1337/2006 have resulted in filing of the said M.J.C. Nos 103/10 and 104/10. The dispute as regards who are the Trustees of the Trust in question, i.e. Bharatiya Aadiwasi Shiv Shikshan Sanstha, Garada has still not culminated in any decision and is pending before the District Court. During the earlier round of litigation, which had reached this Court by way of First Appeal No. 736/2009, which came to be disposed of by the judgment and order dated 23/7/2009, this Court had continued the Ad hoc Committee, which was appointed by the Joint Charity Commissioner to manage the affairs of the Trust albeit with a slight modification. Thereafter the said Ad hoc Committee had continued from time to time and was to continue till the decision was rendered by the Joint Charity Commissioner in the appeals filed by the parties against the acceptance and non-acceptance of the 3 change reports. The judgment and order of the Joint Charity Commissioner dated 4/12/2010 is now the subject matter of the M.J.Cs. before the District Court. By an ad interim order dated 15/6/2011 passed in the above petitions, the said Ad hoc Committee was to continue until further orders of this Court. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Shri Gordey and learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, i.e. Shri Jibhakate, Shri Bhandarkar and Shri Abhyankar submit that the proceedings before the District Court be directed to be disposed of within a particular time frame considering the fact that the Trust which runs seven Schools and three Hostels cannot be allowed to be run by an Ad hoc Committee and that a proper Management of the Trustees should be in place. In my view, the request of the learned Counsel for the parties is reasonable. The Ad hoc Committee has already continued since the year 2009, i.e. almost for a period of more than two years. The above petition is, therefore, disposed of with the following directions : 4 i) The learned District Judge-1, Bhandara is directed to hear and dispose of the M.J.C. Nos. 103/2010 and 104/2010 as expeditiously as possible and not later than four weeks from the appearance of the parties before him. ii) The parties to appear before the learned District Judge-I, Bhandara on 11/7/2011 at 2.30 p.m. The learned District Judge-1 thereafter to fix the schedule for hearing as per his convenience. iii) The Ad hoc Committee, which is continuing since the year 2009 and is being continued by virtue of the ad interim order dated 15/6/2011 passed in the above petitions, to continue till the disposal of the above M.J.Cs. and for a period of two weeks thereafter or till orders are passed by the higher Court in the event either of the parties file proceedings in the higher Court challenging the order passed by the learned District Judge. iv) Since the Ad hoc Committee was comprising of five members and since one member has expired, 5 the said Ad hoc Committee would continue subject to Clause (iii) above. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the respondents state that their respective clients would cooperate in the disposal of the said M.J.Cs. in terms of the directions of this Court. Needless to say that the Ad hoc Committee will be bound by the conditions imposed by the order dated 3/3/2010 in Writ Petition Nos. 589/2010 and 730/2010 and any decision taken by the Ad hoc Committee shall be by unison and not individually by one or two members. JUDGE khj