Manvi Hakka Sanrakshan and Jagruti Vs Charity Commissioner of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court)
Material Facts
The petitioner challenged Revised Circular No. 543 dated 4 July 2018 issued by the Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra, directing issuance of notices to trusts using the phrases “Bhrashtachar Nirmulan Mahasangh”, “Bhrashtachar Virodhi Andolan”, “Bhrashtachar Mukta Bharat” or “Human Rights” in their names and requiring removal of those expressions. The circular stated that eradication of corruption and protection of human rights are functions of the Government, that such names mislead the public, and that appropriate action under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (MPT Act) should be taken if trustees refused to remove them.
Procedural History
The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenged the legality of the circular. The High Court appointed an amicus curiae to assist the Court. The State defended the circular as a measure issued in public interest for supervision and administration under the MPT Act.
Legal Issues
The Court considered:
- Whether the Charity Commissioner had statutory authority under the MPT Act to direct trusts to remove specified words from their names.
- Whether the circular was consistent with the definition of “charitable purpose” under Section 9 of the MPT Act.
- Whether use of phrases relating to corruption or human rights justified compulsory change of trust names.
- Whether action could nevertheless be taken where trusts impersonated Government authorities or functioned as “kangaroo courts.”
Relevant Statutory Provisions
