PICH ROWTHER HAMEEDU ROWTHER Vs. PAMPADY FANCHAYATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by two different persons, calling in question the restraint imposed more or less similarly, on their trade or business by two different Panchayat authorities respectively.

(2.) THESE Panchayats have been constituted by Government under the Tranvancore-Cochin Panchayats Act 2 of 1950 with a view to make better provisions (or the administration of village affairs. Their functions, powers and property are dealt With in Chapter 3 of the Act under Ss. 43 to 51. Of these it is enough for us to note the general provision in Section 44 and also the Clause (d) thereof, as follows: Subject to such rules as may be prescribed a Panchayat shall also make arrangements for carrying out the requirements of the panchayat area in respect of the following matters, namely :-

(3.) NOW it is conceded by both the respondent panchayats that no rules have so far been prescribed under Section 44 Clause (d), with reference to the control of offensive and dangerous trades. It is also conceded that there has been no notification published or rules made as contemplated by Section 80 Clause (1 ). Similarly also that no byelaws have been framed under Section 99 Clause (vii) of the Act.