The Bombay High Court has affirmed that permanent trustees of public charitable trusts cannot be summarily removed without adherence to procedural fairness, notice, and cause, reinforcing the primacy of trust deeds and statutory safeguards under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. This interim order sets a critical precedent for governance of public trusts across Maharashtra.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The plaintiff, Rajesh Mehta, is a permanent trustee of the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, a public charitable trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The defendants, fellow trustees, passed two resolutions on 16 January 2026 and 16 February 2026, removing the plaintiff from his position without prior notice, opportunity to be heard, or specification of any cause.
Procedural History
- The suit was filed on 18 February 2026, the same day the interim application was moved.
- No prior notice or show-cause notice was issued to the plaintiff before the resolutions were passed.
- The plaintiff alleges the resolutions violate both the Trust Deed and the principles of natural justice.
- The plaintiff fears immediate filing of a change report with the Charity Commissioner to effectuate the removal.
Relief Sought
The plaintiff seeks an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from taking any steps to implement the resolutions, including filing reports with the Charity Commissioner, until the court decides the substantive suit.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether a permanent trustee under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 can be removed by a resolution of other trustees without notice, hearing, or stated cause, and whether such removal violates the terms of the Trust Deed and principles of natural justice.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
Mr. Venkatesh Dhond, Senior Advocate, argued that:
- The Trust Deed explicitly designates the plaintiff as a permanent trustee, and removal can only occur through a process prescribed by law.
- Section 56 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 vests exclusive authority to remove trustees in the Charity Commissioner after due inquiry.
- The absence of notice and hearing violates the audi alteram partem principle, a facet of natural justice.
- The resolutions are void ab initio as they contravene both the Trust Deed and statutory mandate.
For the Respondent
The respondents did not appear or file any written submission. The court noted their silence as non-opposition to the petitioner’s prima facie case.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the Trust Deed, particularly Clause 44, which defines the tenure and removal process for permanent trustees. It found no provision empowering fellow trustees to unilaterally remove a permanent trustee. The Court emphasized that the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, is a special statute governing charitable trusts, and its procedural safeguards cannot be bypassed by internal resolutions.
"The power to remove or sustain a permanent Trustee would ultimately lie only with the Charity Commissioner after following the due process of law and not otherwise."
The Court held that the absence of notice, opportunity to be heard, and absence of any stated cause rendered the resolutions procedurally invalid. It further noted that allowing such removals would open the door to arbitrary governance of public trusts, undermining public confidence and statutory intent. The Court rejected the notion that majority trustees can override the tenure of a permanent trustee, especially where the Trust Deed confers such status.
The Court also considered the urgency of the matter, noting the imminent risk of the defendants filing a change report with the Charity Commissioner, which could irreversibly prejudice the plaintiff’s rights.
The Verdict
The plaintiff succeeded. The Court held that permanent trustees cannot be removed without notice, hearing, or cause, and that only the Charity Commissioner has authority under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 to effect such removal. The Court issued an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from acting on the resolutions and directed them to file an affidavit-in-reply.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Trustee Removal Requires Statutory Compliance
- Practitioners must verify the Trust Deed and the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 before challenging or supporting trustee removals.
- Internal resolutions by trustees to remove permanent members are void unless ratified by the Charity Commissioner after due inquiry.
- Any attempt to bypass the Charity Commissioner’s jurisdiction renders subsequent actions legally unsustainable.
Natural Justice Is Non-Negotiable in Trust Governance
- Failure to issue notice or afford hearing to a trustee constitutes a fundamental breach of natural justice.
- Courts will intervene even at the interim stage where such breaches are evident and irreversible harm is likely.
- Affidavits of service and proof of notice must be meticulously maintained in trust-related litigation.
Permanent Status Demands Enhanced Protection
- The term "permanent trustee" is not merely honorific - it confers substantive legal protection.
- Courts will interpret such terms strictly against any attempt to circumvent tenure protections.
- Trust deeds must be scrutinized for tenure clauses; ambiguous language will be construed in favor of the trustee’s security.
