Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

- : 6 :-

Barwani has exceeded its jurisdiction while passing the impugned order wherein not only certain directions have been issued by the Registrar, two trustees, which were made by the petitioner trust were also removed. Counsel has submitted that for removal of trustees there is a separate provision under Sections 9/25 of the Act and for which the remedy lies under Section 8 of the Act.

9. In the considered opinion of this Court, the question which is posed in the present petition is that whether the Registrar Public Trust can pass an order of such a nature removing two trustees and directing the trust to conduct the election by appointing two new trustees from Bharatvarshiya Digambar Jain Tirthkshetra Committee. In the considered opinion of this Court so far as the powers of the Registrar are concerned, the same have been provided under Section 22 of the Act, which reads as under:-

other reason, the Registrar considers it expedient to do so, he shall himself make an application to the Court."

(emphasis supplied)

12. A perusal of the aforesaid provisions clearly reveal that if the vacancies have occurred in the Board, it can be filled through the procedure as provided under Section 25 of the Act, but in the present case admittedly the trustees were appointed by the Trust itself and it appears that no such intimation was given by the Board of trustees to the Registrar Public Trust which has led to removal of the two trustees by the Registrar himself. In the considered opinion of this court, no such discretion is available to the Registrar to remove the Trustees and to direct the trust to conduct the election by appointing two new trustees from Bharatvarshiya Digambar Jain Tirthkshetra Committee. In this regard, reference may be had to a decision rendered by the Division Bench of this court in the case of Dalludas (supra), wherein it is held thus, :-