Prashant Uttamrao Janolkar v. Mahadeo S/O Tulshiramji Mankar And Another
2025:BHC-NAG:10358 1 59-WP-2346-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2346 OF 2024 Prashant Uttamrao Janolkar Vs.
Mahadeo S/o. Tulshirmaji Mankar and Another Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.P. Ghatol h/f. J.B. Gandhi, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A.J. Gilda, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J .
DATED : 07 th OCTOBER, 1.
Heard Mr. S.P. Ghatol holding for Mr. J.B. Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.J. Gilda, learned counsel for the respondents.
2.
The present writ petition is filed against the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola in Enquiry No.710/2013, this application is filed under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and the enquiry is going on. 3.
The petitioner has filed an application by invoking the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for seeking amendment in the application.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by praying for allowing the amendment, the post of Mrs. Vijaya Vinay Gholak is to be corrected as Member of Managing Body and post of Mrs. Shubhangi Sunil
2 59-WP-2346-2024.odt Salonkhe is also to be corrected as Joint Secretary, which refers only to a typographical mistake in the posts of two persons and prayed for permission to correct the same. 5.
Learned counsel for the respondent invited attention of this Court to the application and a consent letter wherein, the posts were specifically mentioned and it also bears their signatures.
6.
After considering the arguments of both the parties, the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola held that, the trial has already commenced in the enquiry and therefore, at this belated stage, such application cannot be entertained. The order passed by the Learned Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola, is legal and proper one and even the enquiry under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 was already proceeded further.
7.
Learned counsel for the respondent has specifically made a statement that the evidence is already closed and therefore, at such a belated stage, it is not proper to interfere with the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola.
8.
In view thereof, no case is made out to interfere in the order of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Akola. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(S IDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE J.
) Privel