DBA, too, isn’t registered under Maha Public Trust Act

Nagpur: On a day when TOI published on how the High Court Bar Association (HCBA) is operating without being registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950, it has come to fore that even the District Bar Association (DBA) is not registered under the same legislation, despite being a public body.
In fact, it’s not even registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, unlike HCBA, thus putting serious doubts on its entire functioning, DBA members said. Many of them called TOI after reading HCBA news, alleging that DBA office-bearers were indulged in massive irregularities and its accounts were not audited since last decade or so.
Admitting the lapse, DBA president Kamal Satuja clarified that their body which assumed the charge last year had started doing audit of the DBA accounts since 2011. “For registration under the Societies Registration Act, you need proper accounts. Our auditing would likely be complete within three to four months, as it a long and tedious process. Only after that we would apply for registrations under both Acts,” he told TOI.
A senior DBA member claimed that his seniors including president Kamal Satuja and secretary Nitin Deshmukh were not sharing the details of expenditure. “DBA has over crore rupees in fixed deposits and also have lakhs with them for spending on other expenditures. However, since last decade or so, the audit was never conducted despite being a public body. The functioning of our superiors is not transparent,” he told TOI.
The differences between DBA members over their functioning is coming out in open after treasurer Anil Gulhane shot of a letter to president stating that he wouldn’t be responsible for any financial transactions, details of expenditure were not shared with him. “I’ve noticed that all cheques and other expenses are directly routed through president and secretary without informing me. Moreover, many bills are cleared without my consent. I will be not be held responsible for any misconduct if noticed in future,” he warned in the letter in possession of TOI.
Satuja defended the act of clearing bills stating that DBA’s constitution didn’t grant any power to treasurer. “All powers of clearing cheques and bills are vested with the president and secretary. The treasurer is from opposite group so he is opposing our moves. Frankly, he used to skip our meetings and didn’t used to report in office for over a week. Now, we can’t wait for him endlessly, as it would lead to delay in clearing bills,” he clarified.
Shrirang Bhandarkar, who had supported Satuja during DBA polls, expressed surprise over the fact that DBA was not registered under any of the Acts. “It’s shocking that DBA and HCBA are not registered under the both legislations despite being public bodies. It’s completely illegal and must be condemned. In absence of registration, the functioning of these bodies can’t be said to be transparent. The lawyers being law-keepers and court’s friends are respected by the citizens and therefore, they must keep everything transparent,” he said.