Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/11542/2010 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR STAY No. 11542 of 2010
In
FIRST
APPEAL No. 2933 of 2010
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 11538 of 2010
In
FIRST APPEAL No. 2932 of 2010
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 11561 of 2010
In
FIRST APPEAL No. 2935 of 2010
=========================================================
SUNIL
HASMUKHBHAI SHAH & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
IRABEN
VINUBHAI DESAI TRUSTEE & DIRECTOR OF ANKUR SCHOOL & 11 -
Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
M/S
THAKKAR ASSOC. for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MR MANAV A MEHTA for Respondent(s) :
1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 10.
MR APURVA R KAPADIA for
Respondent(s) : 11,
MR MI MERCHANT for Respondent(s) :
12,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 22/11/2010
ORAL
ORDER
The
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4880 of 2010 has passed the
following order :-
The
Appeal above-mentioned being called on for hearing before this Court
on the 18th day of June, 2010, UPON
perusing the record and hearing counsel for the appearing parties
above-mentioned, THIS COURT DOTH inter-alia, PASS the
following ORDER :
However, looking to the fact
that the schools are going to be re-opened shortly and many
admissions are to be made, we deem it fit and proper that the
existing committee would continue to function strictly under the
supervision of the Charity Commissioner or his delegate. To
safeguard the interest of both the parties and to work out the
equities, we deem it fit and proper to give the following directions,
namely :-
1. Charity Commissioner or his
delegate shall supervise and look after the overall working of the
appellant no. 1 Trust;
2. Except for carrying on day to
day affairs of the Trust, respondents herein will not be allowed to
make any policy decision nor will be permitted to make any fresh
appointments except those who are already working;
3. As far as financial
requirement is concerned except for day to day requirement of the
finance, nothing more than that would be permitted to be withdrawn by
the respondents, unless a written permission is sought from the
Charity Commissioner;
4. Needless to say, the accounts
for the said period during which the respondents would be managing
the affairs of the appellant no.1 Trust would be furnished to the
Charity Commissioner. Even otherwise, Charity Commissioner would be
at liberty to look into the accounts of the appellant no.1 at any
point of time, without giving any notice to them.
In our considered opinion, the
aforesaid directions would sufficiently safeguard the interests of
both the parties, at least till the pendency of the Appeal.
Even though the learned single
Judge has directed that the appeal preferred by respondents herein
and pending before Additional City Sessions Judge be considered and
disposed of within a period of six months, i.e. by or before
5.10.2010, but looking to the urgency involved, we direct the
Appellate authority to consider and dispose of the said appeal on
merits, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of months
hereof. We, however, clarify that while considering the appeal on
merits, it would not be influenced in any manner whatsoever by any of
the orders passed by the High Court or by this Court. In view of
this, the matter pending before High Court also stands disposed of.
With the aforesaid directions,
this appeal stands disposed of, but no order as to costs.
The
original applicant is represented and other parties have accepted the
same. Therefore, the order of the Apex Court will not adversely
affect the parties. Hence, the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
will continue during the pendency of the appeal.
The
applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(K.S.
Jhaveri, J.)
Caroline
Top