( 1 ) THE petitioners are all residents of Gangavathi Town. Town Municipal council Gangavati is the Local Authority functioning under the Karnataka municipalities Act, 1964 for that Town. All the petitioners own large number of pigs. As stated in the petition the first petitioner owns about 700 pigs, and the second petitioner owns about 600 pigs and the 3rd petitioner owns about 2000 prgs. me petitioners are aggrieved by the proposal of the Town Municipal Council to auction the right of collecting the pigdung dropped by the pigs belonging to the petitioners in the Municipal area. The contention of the petitioners is that the pigs are their property and consequently the dung dropped by the pigs belonging to them is also their property and consequently the right to collect such pig-dung is their fundamental right and the Municipal Council is making an unjust encroachment on the said fundamental right of the petitioners by auctioning the right to collect the pig-dung dropped in the Municipal area. The contention on behalf of the Municipal Council is that the dung dropped by the pigs on the area belonging to the Municipal Council forms the property of the Municipal Council in view of Sec. 81 (2) (c) of the Act. The said provision reads as follows;"sec. 81 (2) (e): All public sewers and drains, and all sewers, drains, tunnels, culverts, gutters and water courses, in, alongside or under any street, and all works, materials and things appertaining thereto, as also all dust, dirt, dung, ashes refuse, animal matter or filth or rubbish of any kind collected by the municipal council from the streets, houses, privies sewers, cess-pools or elsewhere. It is also further contended that it is an obligatory function of the Municipal council under Sec. 87 (c) and (r) of the Act to dean the public streets and other public places and also remove the rubbish left on the area belonging to the Municipal Council which according lo the explanation given to the word 'rubbish' in Sec. 87 (r) of the Act, includes the dung it is no dobut true that the petitioners are the owners of the pigs and consequently they have the right to collect the dung dropped by the pigs belonging to them, but they can do so when the same is dropped on the land or in any premises belonging to them. But the question for consideration is whether the petitioners can claim such right even when the dung is dropped at any open space belonging to the Municipal Council? In view of see. 81 (c) of the Act it becomes the property of the Municipal Council. Further it is also the duty of the Municipal Council to remove the same in view of the obligatory function imposed on it under Sec. 87 (c) and (r) of the Act referred to above. The contention of the petitioners that even if the dung is dropped in any place belonging to the Municipal Council it is their property and they have the right and therefore they should be permitted to collect the dung, if accepted would only result in confusion as it is impossible for the petitioners to identify the dung which is dropped by the pigs belonging to them from the dung dropped by the pi'gs not belonging to them and collect the same. "the above question came up for consideration in WP. NO. 1071 of 1074. In the said case a resident of Gokak Municipality questioned the legality of a similar action of Gokak Town Municipal Council. Jagannatha Shetty, j. while rejecting the writ petition observed as follows:"the Municipality is under a statutory obligation to keep the municipal area clean and tidy. The Municipality has announced that the right to collect dung of the pigs roaming about in the Municipal area, would be sold by public auction. The petitioner cannot say that he has got exclusive right to collect the dung within the Municipal area. I cannot see any such right with him. He may have such right in his premises and not in public places. "i am entirely in agreement with the view expressed in the aforesaid judgment. As pointed out earlier the dung dropped in any area belonging to the municipal Council becomes the property of the Municipality concerned, and it can dispose off the same in any manner it pleases. This is also consistent with obligatory function of the Municipal Council to keep the municipal area clean. Therefore the Musicipal Council was within their power when they decided to auction the right to collect the pig-dung dropped in Municipal area. This is also consistent with obligatory function of the Municipal Council to keep the municipal area clean. Therefore the Musicipal Council was within their power when they decided to auction the right to collect the pig-dung dropped in Municipal area. The petitioners have failed to make out that the Municipal Council have acted beyond the power conferred on them under the Act for the reasons stated above the Rule is discharged. Writ Petitions are dismissed, but without costs. --- *** --- .