‘Trustees’ appointment not to accommodate politicians’: HC sets aside MVA decision on new Shirdi Trust panel

The bench held, “The said Sansthan Trust which is set up with the purpose of public cause having properties worth crores of rupees… and lakhs of devotees…is not for accommodating politicians….”

It added, “The appointment of trustees to such a public Trust has to satisfy the test of public interest by keeping the purpose and intent of creating such trust under the said Act…in the interest of large members of public devotees of Shri Sai Baba and not the private interest of the ruling government to accommodate their party workers or politicians. The purpose and intent of creating such Trust by the state government under the scheme sanctioned by the court is thus ex-facie defeated for the political gains of the party in power.”

A division bench of Justice Ramesh D Dhanuka and Justice Sanjay G Mehare was passing the judgment in two public interest litigations (PILs) filed by Uttamrao Shelke and Nikhil Dorje, challenging the constitution of a new managing committee for the Sansthan chaired by NCP MLA Ashutosh Kale, through the then MVA government notification.

The PILs stated that per the Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust, Shirdi Act, 2004 and 2013 Rules, the committee should be represented by at least one woman, one member from socially and economically weaker sections, eight persons possessing professional or specialised knowledge, and seven from the general category. The same was not complied with while appointing the new committee and therefore, it should not be allowed to take charge of the Trust from October 19, the petitioners argued.

Senior Advocate Rajendra S Deshmukh, representing Dorje, and Advocate Pradnya S Talekar for Shelke submitted that most of the members of new committee including Kale, and Rahul Kanal of Shiv Sena, who is a close associate of Aaditya Thackeray, along with members belonging to the Congress, were ineligible to be nominated as per the 2004 Act and subsequent Rules.

Senior Advocate R N Dhorde, a special counsel for the state government, along with Additional Government Pleader D R Kale, justified the decision stating that the candidates who have been nominated fit into the scheme of law and are duly qualified as per categories prescribed in the 2014 law and subsequent Rules.

Newsletter | Click to get the day’s best explainers in your inbox

The Court had concluded the hearing and closed the pleas for verdict on April 21 this year.

Referring to a 2017 judgment by another bench which had expected the state government to “at least keep God away while distributing public largesses,” the court held that none of the appointments was made in compliance with the previous court directions or principles laid down in law and quashed the government notification. It also rejected a request by some of the Trustees seeking to stay operation of its judgment.