Authorities Cannot Direct Removal Of "National" From Trust Name Under Maharashtra Public Trusts Act: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that authorities under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act do not have jurisdiction to direct a change in the name of a trust. The Court observed that the statutory scheme of the Act does not contemplate any enquiry into the suitability of the name of a trust, and therefore, no such power can be exercised by the authorities.

Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh was hearing a writ petition filed by the National Egg Co-Ordination Committee challenging the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, directing the deletion of the word “National” from the name of the trust in suo motu revision proceedings under Section 70A of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. The proceedings originated from a complaint alleging that use of the word “National” created an impression that the trust was a government entity and caused confusion among farmers and traders, and that such use was impermissible under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950. The petitioner opposed the action on the ground that the authorities lacked jurisdiction, that there was no prohibition on the use of the word “National”, and that the complaint was belated and unsupported by any material.

The Court first considered the issue of jurisdiction and examined the scheme of Sections 18 and 19 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, which deal with registration of a public trust and the scope of enquiry. It noted that the enquiry under Section 19 is confined to matters such as the existence of the trust, its property, objects, trustees and related particulars, and does not extend to examining the suitability of the name of the trust. The Court further observed that the Rules framed under the Act also do not provide for any such enquiry, but only contemplate the recording of a change in the name if such a change is made.

The Court noted that it has been held that once a certificate of registration is issued, the authorities under the Act do not have the power to direct a change of the name of the trust. The Court clarified that if the name of a trust gives an impression of government patronage, action can be taken under the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, by the authorities under that enactment, and not under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act.

“The statutory scheme of the MPT Act does not contemplate any enquiry by the authorities as to the suitability of the name of the public trust and the Rules only provide that upon a change in the name of the trust, the authorities would record the same in the register maintained and a fresh certificate would be issued,” the Court observed.

The Court then examined the impugned order and found that the Joint Charity Commissioner had assumed jurisdiction on the basis that the trust was registered under the Act, which was held to be erroneous. It observed that the finding that the declaration of egg prices by the petitioner created confusion in the minds of farmers was not supported by any material on record.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner.

Case Title: National Egg Co-Ordination Committee vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 14247 of 2023]

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 167

Click Here To Read/Download Order