SHREEPATI AUGUST ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA (THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY)

                                                                               25-WP-4601-2026.DOC




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 4601 OF 2026


                      Shreepati August Estate Private Limited & Anr                ..Petitioners
                            Versus
                      State of Maharashtra Through Principal                   …Respondents
                      Secretary, Housing Department & Ors

                      Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate, with Nitesh Ranavat, Disha
                             Shetty and Bhairavi Shah, i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co, for the
                             Petitioner.
                      Ms. Fatima Lakdawala, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
                      Ms. Sneha Prabhu, for Respondent No.2.
                      Dr Birendra Saraf, Senior Advocate, with Vaibhav Charawala, Prachi
                             Garg and Shikha Shah, i/b DSK Legal, for Respondent Nos. 4 to
                             7.
                      Mr. Aditya S Lele, with Gita B, for Respondent No.8.


                                                    CORAM:         N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                    DATE :         6th OCTOBER 2026


                      P.C.:
ARUN
RAMCHANDRA
SANKPAL
                      1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
Digitally signed by
ARUN RAMCHANDRA
SANKPAL
Date: 2026.10.07
11:02:44 +0530
                      2.      The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 9 th March 2026

                      passed by the learned Charity Commissioner granting sanction to the

                      alienation of the trust property to Respondent No.4-trust.

                      3.      Mr. Tulzapurkar, the learned Senior Advocate, for the Petitioners

                      submits that the Petitioner’s case falls within the proviso to Sub-Section



                      ARS                                    1/2
                                                       25-WP-4601-2026.DOC

(2) of Section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (“the Act,

1950”) as a fraud was practiced on the Charity Commissioner.

4.     In view of the aforesaid nature of the challenge, the Petitioners

ought to have first invoked the remedy of seeking revocation of the

permission granted by the Charity Commissioner under the proviso to

Sub-Section (2) of Section 36 of the Act, 1950.

5.    Thus, the Petition stands disposed with liberty to the Petitioners

to invoke the remedy under the proviso of Sub-Section (2) of Section 36

of the Act, 1950.

6.    If such Application is filed within a period of one week, the

Charity Commissioner is requested to hear and dispose of such

Application as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period

of 10 weeks, thereafter.

7.    However, all contentions of all the parties, including the aspect of

locus of the Petitioner, are kept open for consideration by the Charity

Commissioner.



                                            [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




ARS                                   2/2