Bombay High Court
Faiyyaz Husain Zawwar Husain And ... vs Arshan Alikhan Munvar Alikhan And ... on 11 March, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:11669
1 WP 14461-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 14461 OF 2023
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4656 OF 2022
FAIYYAZ HUSAIN ZAWWAR HUSAIN AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
ASIF KHAN ARIF KHAN AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Shripad S. Kulkarni - Advocate for Petitioners in both Petitions
Mr. D.A. Karnik - Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3, 5, 7, 10 to 14, 16
to 19 in W.P. No. 14461 of 2023
Mr. P.D. Bachate - Advocate for Respondent No.1 in W.P. 4656 of 2022
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 11.03.2026
ORDER:
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the respective respondents in both the petitions.
2. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.14461 of 2023 are aggrieved by the order dated 06.03.2019 passed below Exhibit-10 by the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner, Aurangabad in Inquiry No.128 of 2018, whereby the application was partly allowed and respondent Nos.1 to 20 were permitted to intervene in the matter. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.4656 of 2022 are aggrieved by the order dated 08.02.2022 passed below Exhibit-48 by the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner, Aurangabad in the same inquiry, whereby the application was allowed 2 WP 14461-2023.odt and the intervenor was added as a respondent in the proceedings.
3. Learned Counsel Mr. Shripad Kulkarni for the petitioners in both the petitions submits that the petitioners are the office bearers of a public trust namely Sir Sayyad Education Society, F-1075. He submits that the membership of the respondents was declared illegal in view of the order passed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Aurangabad in Inquiry No.153 of 2014. According to him, the respondents whose membership has already been held invalid are not entitled to participate in the present proceedings as they cannot be treated as "interested persons". Therefore, the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner ought not to have allowed their application for intervention. Learned Counsel further invited the attention of this Court to Section 73-A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act (for short "the Act") as well as the definitions contained in Section 2(10)(d) and 2(10)(e) of the Act, and submitted that the respondents do not have any personal interest in the trust. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.6002 of 2022 with Interim Application No.3164 of 2022 (Prasad Manohar Thorve Vs. The Assistant Charity Commissioner and Others) , and contended that the respondents cannot be treated as interested persons and therefore the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner committed an error in passing the impugned orders.
4. Per contra, learned Counsel Mr. D.A. Karnik and learned Counsel 3 WP 14461-2023.odt Mr. P.D. Bachate appearing for the respective respondents supported the orders passed by the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner, Aurangabad. In support of their submissions they relied upon the following judgments of this Court :
(a) Mohd. Sabir Usman Naik and Anr. Vs. Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati and Ors., in Writ Petition No.3189 of 2019 decided on 07.11.2025 (Bench at Nagpur)
(b) Dhanraj Tejram Selokar and Ors. Vs. Jayant Annasaheb Rannaware and Ors., in Writ Petition No. 4057 of 2019 decided on 17.11.2025 (Bench at Nagpur)
(c) Ashok Shreekrishna Beharay Vs. Joint Charity Commissioner and Anr., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 3993 (Bench at Bombay)
(d) Suresh Hiralal Shah Vs. Shree Mahavir Swami Digambar Jain Mandir Trust, reported in 2001(3) Mh.L.J. 147 (Bench at Bombay)
5. Having heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties and upon perusal of the order passed below Exhibit-10, it appears that in paragraph 6 of the application at page 46 of Writ Petition No.14461 of 2023 the applicants have specifically contended that they obtained membership of the trust in the year 2013 and that the executive committee constituted at that time was in existence. The proceedings in question are initiated under Section 41-A of the Act, which empowers the Charity Commissioner to issue directions for proper administration of the
4 WP 14461-2023.odt trust. The respondents have filed their objections contending that they have an interest in the trust and that they were members since the year 2013. Section 41 A of the Act reads as under :
41A. Power of Commissioner to issue directions 5[for proper administration of the trust.--
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Charity Commissioner may from time to time issue directions to any trustee of a public trust or any person connected therewith, to ensure that the trust is properly administered, and the income thereof is properly accounted for or duly appropriated and applied to the objects and for the purposes of the trust; and the Charity Commissioner may also give directions to the trustees or such person that if he finds any property of the trust is in danger of being wasted, damaged, alienated or wrongfully sold, removed or disposed of :
Provided that, if any application is made by the trustee of any trust for seeking directions under sub-section (1), the Charity Commissioner shall decide such application within three months form the date of its receipt and if it is not practicable so to do, the Charity Commissioner shall record the reasons for the same. (2) It shall be the duty of every trustee or of such person to comply with the directions issued under sub-
section (1)."
6. As regards the reliance placed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners on the judgment of this Court, though the said judgment deserves due respect, the facts involved therein are distinguishable and 5 WP 14461-2023.odt therefore the same would not be applicable to the present case. Considering the nature of the proceedings and the contention raised by the respondents claiming interest in the trust, this Court finds that the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has rightly permitted their intervention so that the matter can be adjudicated on merits. The petitioners would also get full opportunity to contest the proceedings.
7. In view thereof, this Court finds that the learned Deputy Charity Commissioner has not committed any error while passing the impugned orders. Hence, no interference is warranted in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
8. Hence, both the Writ Petitions stand dismissed.
9. There shall be no order as to costs.
10. Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE Pooja Kale/