Shri Shantilal Pokharna Trustee Of J K Trust Bombay v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5176 OF 2023 Shri. Shantilal Pokharna, Trustee of JK Trust, Bombay ...

Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and another ...

Respondents .........

Mr. Pradeep Thorat instructed by Mr. Rajiv Bafna for the Petitioner. Ms. M.S. Srivastava, AGP for the State.

.........

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATED : 29 NOVEMBER 2023 P.C. :- 1.

Petitioner is a public charitable trust registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950. In the year 2016, the petitioner had purchased agricultural land admeasuring about 69.72 acres situated at Village Hasda, Taluka Berla, District Bemetara to implement "National Programme for Bovine Breeding (NPBB)" by Government of Chhatisgarh. The Government of Chhattisgarh however subsequently decided to discontinue the said programme. 2.

As the land was lying unutilized, application under Section 36(1)(a) of the Act was filed before the respondent no.2 seeking prior permission to alienate part of the land admeasuring about 37.8 acres. By order dated 6 December 2021 permission was granted subject to condition that sale proceeds shall be invested in the FDR. The petitioner accordingly 1 / 10

invested the entire sale proceeds of Rs.4,68,00,000/- in FDRs. 3.

By the order impugned the respondent no.2 - Joint Charity Commissioner has rejected the application/filed by the petitioner to withdraw/encash the said FDRs.

4.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondent-State.

5.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that land in question was purchased by the petitioner out of it's working capital. It is submitted that the application to withdraw/encash FDRs was made due to various liabilities. It is submitted that necessary documents were produced on record in support of the application, however, the respondent no.2 for no valid reasons rejected the application.

6.

On the other hand, the learned AGP supported the impugned order.

7.

I have perused the impugned order. The fact that the land in question was purchased by the petitioner out of it's working capital is not in dispute. No finding is recorded that there exists no liabilities as claimed by the petitioner or that there are other sources from which the petitioner can discharge the said liabilities. The petitioner has filed an undertaking that details of payment made towards the said liabilities will be submitted to the office of Charity Commissioner.

2 / 10

8.

For ease of reference, the said undertaking alongwith certificate of Chartered Accountant is scanned and reproduced hereunder : 3 / 10

4 / 10

5 / 10

6 / 10

7 / 10

8 / 10

9 / 10

9.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to allow the present petition. The petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date:

2023.11.29 17:59:44 +0530 KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI 10 / 10