Full Judgment
1. The petitioner is the Vasudevanallur Town Panchayat, represented through its Executive Officer. In the writ petition, town panchayat seeks for a direction to the Panchayat Union Commissioner, Vasudevanallur, Sivagiri Taluk, to transfer the assets stand in the name of Rajagopalaperikulam, a Bound situated in Shenbegavinayagar Kovil Street, a vacant site and six shops situated on the west of the Vasudevanallur Police Station which lie under the jurisdiction of the petitioner town panchayat from the respondent for maintenance and management along with deposits and licence fees.
2.It is seen from the records that the petitioner sent a letter to the District Collector on 05.11.2007 as well as on 26.11.2007 seeking for entrustment of the properties which belong to the panchayat and the resolution passed by the town panchayat was also enclosed. When they do not receive reply from the District Collector a further meeting was held on 05.11.2007 by resolution No.577, the respondent was directed to hand over those properties and the same was not forthcoming, the present writ petition came to be filed.
3.In the writ petition only the Panchayat Union Commissioner alone is the party. It was admitted on 12.12.2008. Despite notice from this Court, the respondent has not filed any counter affidavit. Even otherwise, if the properties are now vested with the town panchayat which is governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act. Section 3(b)(3), the Governor by notification can exclude from the town panchayat any area and include any area by notification into a panchayat union any local area contiguous thereto and also cancel or modify any area included or excluded.
4.Likewise, a panchayat uion which is constituted under Section 2(23) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act read with Section 16 which is constituted by the State Government and under Section 15 (4), the State by any notification exclude from a panchayat development block any area or village or include in a panchayat development block and cancel or modify.
5.In case of disputes between the two local bodies, over the properties or areas in question, Section 371 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act vests with the State Government, the power to remove any difficulties, the said power is only transitory power as per the proviso to Section 371.
6.Similarly, under Section 256 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, the power to remove any difficulty is also set out which is identical to Section
371. But however, the very constitution of a panchayat union under the Panchayats Act as well as the town panchayat (converted into third grade municipality), the power to notify or denotify of a particular area or power to transfer or denotify areas already notified vests with the State Government and therefore, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal of the respondent in not returning any property to which they are entitled to have possession, the only course open to them to petition the State Government for passing appropriate orders after hearing both sides.
7.The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court to an order of this Court in Radhapuram Panchayat union, Radhapuram Vs. Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department and others, reported in 2007 (6) MLJ 362. That judgment came to be rendered entirely on a different context. In that case, on a direction issued by this Court, the State Government was directed to consider and pass appropriate orders found that the property in question namely a shopping complex belonging to the panchayat union, the District Collector was directed to settle the issue of collection of rent and revenue sharing between the two local bodies. It is not clear as to how the said judgment will have any application to the case on hand.
8.In the absence of the petitioner petitioning the State Government, this Court is not inclined to give any direction to the respondent. It is rather unfortunate that despite notice being served on the respondent, the respondent has not appeared and till date no counter affidavit has been filed. In any event, since necessary and proper parties have not made as parties to the writ petition, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.