1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 5212 OF 2009. ( Babanrao D. Jawade -: versus :- Asstt. Charity Commissioner 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 : DECEMBER 9, 2009. Heard Shri A.S. Kilor, learned counsel for petitioner, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1 and Shri A.Z. Jibhkate, leaned counsel for respondent no.2. Grievance made by Shri Kilor, learned counsel for petitioner is that, the Assistant Charity Commissioner has in judgment dated 29.08.2009 made some observations which are damaging to the petitioner. He, therefore, states that those observations need to be quashed and set aside. He clarifies that in so far as actual directions issued in operative part of said judgment are concerned, the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the same. Shri Jibhkate, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5 and 7 and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1, state that opportunity was given to petitioner to file written statement on merits, and instead of filing that written statement only preliminary objection was raised. They invite 2 attention to conduct of petitioner as recorded in the impugned judgment to show that because of that conduct, the Assistant Charity Commissioner has made those observations. Learned A.G.P. further states that, there are no categorical findings that the documents produced are fabricated or manipulated. Perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that because of attitude of petitioner in the matter and non production of original record for quite some time or then of placing of xerox copies belatedly, the present respondent urged that there was possibility of documents being manipulated or tampered with. The learned Assistant Charity Commissioner has only found substance in that possibility. However, the respondent no.1 Assistant Charity Commissioner has not recorded any categorical finding in relation to any particular document, either original or xerox, that said document was tampered with or manipulated or fabricated. I, therefore, find that the grievance made by petitioner before this Court is misconceived. In view of the readiness and willingness shown by the petitioner to comply with the operative part of the order, nothing survives in the Writ Petition. The same is accordingly disposed of, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.