SANGEET LODHA,J. - (1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality of proceedings initiated by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan, Jodhpur under Section 23 of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (for short "the Act") on the application made by the respondent no.3 & 5 herein, for recording the changes occurred in the entries recorded in the register maintained by the Assistant Commissioner under Section 21 of the Act, in conformity with the Form No.8 produced under Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Rules, 1962 (for short "the Rules")
(2.) The facts relevant are that Shri Sonana Khetlaji (Shri Kshetrapalji) Trust Committee ('the Trust"), is a public trust registered under the Act. The elections of the Trust were held on 9.7.15 wherein 15 working trustees were elected. Shri Jayendra Singh representing the Trust before this court was elected as President of the Trust. The members of the working committee convened a meeting wherein it was observed that the elected President Jayendra Singh is not convening the meeting and therefore, a notice should be given to him with request to convene the meeting of the Working Committee of Trust. Later, in a meeting convened which was presided over by Ganpat Singh, respondent no.3 herein, by adopting a resolution, a No Confidence Motion was passed against the President and other office bearers of the Trust. Thereafter, yet another meeting convened on 18.7.16 elections of the office bearers of the Working Committee was held wherein the respondent no.3 was elected as President. After the election as aforesaid, the newly elected President and Secretary submitted the Form No.8 under Rule 22 of the Rules before the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan, Jodhpur for recording changes in the constitution of the Working Committee. Pursuant thereto, the proceedings were initiated by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan, under Section 23 of the Act. The petitioner filed objections to the Form No.8 filed as aforesaid, which is pending consideration before the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan. According to the petitioner, the proceedings initiated by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan, under Section 23 of the Act is without jurisdiction. Hence, this petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that under Section 23 of the Act, the Assistant Commissioner is empowered only to record the changes occurred. Learned counsel submitted that while exercising power under Rule 23, the Assistant Commissioner is not empowered to adjudicate the election dispute. Learned counsel submitted that the elections of office bearers of the Working Committee of the Trust were held as per the bye-laws in June, 2015 and thereafter, the meetings of Working Committee are being convened regularly. Learned counsel submitted that the acts of the respondent no.3 in convening the meeting, passing the No Confidence Motion and holding fresh election contrary to the provisions of bye-laws of the Trust are illegal and void and therefore, the Form No.8 filed by the respondent no.3, cannot be taken cognizance of by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan. Drawing the attention of the court to the provisions of Section 38 of the Act, learned counsel submitted if the Trust property is not being properly managed or administered, it is open for the Assistant Commissioner to make appropriate inquiry on the application being filed in this regard by any person having interest in the public trust and on being satisfied about the same, may direct the working trustee or any other trustee or person having interest in the trust to apply to the court for directions and thus, the matter which can be a subject matter of inquiry under Section 38 of the Act, no proceedings could have been initiated by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan under Section 23 of the Act.;