Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Rajendra Kumar on 18 April, 2023
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
WA No. 788 of 2018
(THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs RAJENDRA KUMAR)
Dated : 18-04-2023
Shri Vaibhav Bhagwat, learned Govt. Advocate for the appellant/State.
Shri Ayushyaman Choudhary, learned counsel for the Respondent .
Heard on I.A. No. 1801/2023, an application seeking amendment in the petition.
This writ appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uccha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been preferred by the State of M.P. being aggrieved by the order dated 09.02.2017 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.2214/2012(S).
The respondents had challenged the order dated 31.01.2012 by which the Sub-Divisional Officer/Registrar, Public Trust, Dewas had cancelled the permission given to one of the trustees namely Rajendra Kumar, who is the petitioner in the writ petition to dispose of the trust property.
Learned Single Judge had set aside the order to the extent that trust property has been treated as Government property whereas has upheld the order extending the permission to dispose of the trust property.
The appellant/State has filed I.A. No. 1801/2023, which is an application for amendment in the cause title on the ground that during the pendency of this appeal, the respondent no.1 - Rajendra Kumar died on 26.07.2021. The respondent no.1 was the trustee and since he do not claim any personal right in the trust property, therefore his LRs' were not required to be brought on record. Instead, the District Collector, Dewas being a trustee, name of respondent no.1 - Rajendra Kumar be replaced with 'The Collector, Dewas".
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 4/19/2023 6:22:39 PM 2Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submitted that as per the gudelines, if any trustee dies, then the senior most member of the trust is to be substituted in his place. In the present case, the Collector, Dewas himself is the appellant, therefore, in any case, his name cannot be substituted in place of respondent no.1 - Rajendra Kumar. The respondent trust had also filed an application before the Registrar, Public Trust to appoint the new trustee in place of Late Rajendra Kumar. The said application was kept pending, therefore this Court vide order dated 27.02.2023 directed the Registrar, Public Trust to decide the application with regard to appointment of new trustee. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the said application has been rejected on the ground of pendency of the writ appeal inspite of the fact that liberty was extended by this Court to decide the same in accordance with law. There are lot of senior members available in the trust who can be appointed as a trustee. The Collector cannot defend the case as well as oppose the case from both the sides.
Accordingly, I.A. stands rejected. The Registrar, Public Trust ought to have decided the application to appoint the new trustee as per the guidelines (Annexure A/4 with the writ appeal), but the same has been rejected on the ground of pendency of the present appeal. Admittedly, the appeal cannot be decided finally without a new trustee being appointed. In the circumstances, the Registrar, Public Trust is directed to decide the application for appointment of a new trustee as per the guidelines Annexure A/4) afresh, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two weeks from today. Thereafter, the appellants shall file an application to substitute a new trustee in place of respondent no.1 - Rajendra Kumar.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 4/19/2023 6:22:39 PM 3List this case in the week commencing 8th May, 2023.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 4/19/2023
6:22:39 PM