Judgment :- 1. The question, briefly stated, that arises for decision depends on the construction to be placed on S.62 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960. This section was amended by Act 22 of 1967, the Kerala Panchayats (Amendment) Act, 1967 which came into force on 1-11-67. For resolving the controversy in this case, it is necessary to read the section as it stood before it was amended by Act 22 of 1967 and to read the section after it was so amended. The sections before and after the amendments are extracted in an appendix to this judgment. 2. Regarding the effect of S.82 (1), which was similarly worded as S.62 (1) before both sections were amended (S. 82 was also amended by Act 22 of 1967), a Division Bench of this Court in writ appeal 22 of 1969 (Meenachil Panchayat v. Chacko Devassia reported in 1971 KLT. Short Notes 46) held that the 'vesting' under that section was only for the purpose of maintenance and control. This means that the property does not stand transferred to the Panchayat and all rights and liabilities in relation to the properties also do not stand transferred to the Panchayat. There can be little doubt that after the amendment by virtue of the wording of S.62 (A) as amended and by virtue of the clarification in sub-section (1A)) of S.62 the ownership will itself stand transferred along with all rights and liabilities to the Panchayat. There is no doubt that this must happen with effect from 11167, the date on which the amendment came into operation. The question is whether by virtue of subsection (1A) of S.62 it is right to assume that there has been a transfer and vesting not from 11167 but from 1162 as was thought of by Mathew, J. in disposing of the controversy between the petitioner Panchayat and the State Government on a former occasion by Ext. P3 judgment. The question is whether by virtue of subsection (1A) of S.62 it is right to assume that there has been a transfer and vesting not from 11167 but from 1162 as was thought of by Mathew, J. in disposing of the controversy between the petitioner Panchayat and the State Government on a former occasion by Ext. P3 judgment. Counsel for the petitioner contends that by virtue of the wording of sub-section (1A) of S.62 it is clear that the rights and liabilities stood transferred with effect from 1-1-62-In support of this it was submitted that the word 'vest' was used in S.62 (1) as it stood before the amendment and therefore it must be taken that S.62 (1A) when it refers to 'such vesting' it was referring to the vesting under the amended Act and therefore the rights and liabilities in relation to the properties stood transferred with effect from 1162. I find it difficult to accept this argument. S.62 (1A) only clarifies what is meant by'vesting' under the section. S.62 (1A) has admittedly no retrospective effect. It cannot therefore possibly refer to a vesting before 1-11-67. 3. In the above view, I need not enter into the controversy in this case as to whether the district roads are exempt from the vesting under S.62 (1) or not for I shall assume that before the amendment was introduced by Act 22 of 1967 the district roads too stood vested with the Panchayat. This vesting however can only be a vesting for maintenance and control and cannot give the right to sell the trees standing on the property as has been done by the Panchayat. Since the auction took place before 1-11-67, it has to be determined whether the Panchayat had any right at that time to auction the trees. From what I have stated above, the Panchayat did not get any right to the trees because the amendment became effective only from 11167. I see therefore no reason to interfere with the order of the Collector, Ext. P4. 4. I might add that Mathew J. did not decide the question by Ext. P3 judgment but only directed the Collector to deal with the matter. I must further state that the order of the Collector Ext. I see therefore no reason to interfere with the order of the Collector, Ext. P4. 4. I might add that Mathew J. did not decide the question by Ext. P3 judgment but only directed the Collector to deal with the matter. I must further state that the order of the Collector Ext. P4 proceeds on the basis that district roads do not vest with the Panchayat apparently by virtue of the provision is S.62(1) as amended by Act 22 of 1967. He failed to note that this amendment can take effect only from 11167 and the auction took place before that date. Nevertheless since the Panchayat had no right to the trees at the time they were auctioned I see no grounds to interfere. I dismiss this petition. There will be no order as to costs. APPENDIX S.62 Before Amendment: "62. Vesting of public roads in Panchayats. (1) All public roads in any Panchayat area other than roads classified as National Highways, State Highways and the roads of the Malabar District Board, shall vest in the Panchayat together with all pavements, stones and other materials thereof; all works, materials and other things provided therefor, all sewers, drains, drainage works, tunnels and culverts, whether made at the cost of the Panchayat fund or otherwise, in, alongside or under such roads, and all works, materials and things appertaining thereto. (2) The Government may at any time, by notification in the Gazette, exclude from the operation of this Act any such public road, sewer, drain, drainage work, tunnel or culvert and may also modify or cancel such notification, and thereupon they shall revest in Government. (3) The Government may at any time by notification in the Gazette, order the vesting of any public road or class of public roads in a Panchayat and thereupon notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s.(1) such road or roads shall vest in the Panchayat" After Amendment: 62. (3) The Government may at any time by notification in the Gazette, order the vesting of any public road or class of public roads in a Panchayat and thereupon notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s.(1) such road or roads shall vest in the Panchayat" After Amendment: 62. Vesting of public roads in Panchayats, (1) All public roads in any Panchayat area other than roads classified as National Highways, State Highways or district roads, shall stand transferred to, and vest, in the Panchayat together with ail payments, stones and other materials thereof, all works materials and other things provided therefor, all sewers, drains, drainage works, tunnels and culverts, whether made at the cost of the Panchayat fund or otherwise, in, alongside or under such roads, and all works, materials and things appertaining thereto. 1A. Subject to the provisions of this Act, all rights and liabilities of the Government in relation to the public roads and other properties, materials and things vested in the Panchayat under Sub-s. (1) or sub-s. (3) shall, from the date of such vesting, be the rights and liabilities of the Panchayat. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s. (1) or sub-s. (1A), the Government may at any time, by notification in the Gazette, exclude from the operation of this Act any such public road, sewer, drain, drainage work, tunnel or culvert and may also modify or cancel such notification, and thereupon they shall revest in Government: Provided that, before issuing such a notification, the Government shall consult the Panchayat concerned and give due regard to its objections, if any; (3) The Government may, by notification in the Gazette, order the transfer to, and vesting in, a Panchayat, of any public road or class of public roads in the Panchayat and thereupon such road or roads shall, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s. (1), but subject to the other provisions of this Act, stand transferred to, and vest in, such Panchayat.