NANAVATI, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is Porbandar Nagarpalika. It has filed this petition against the State Government and the Collector as they are trying to deal with and sell open plots of land situated within the Municipal limits of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that all open plots of land vest in and belong to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, prays, that a suitable writ or order be issued restraining the State and its officers from dealing with open plots of land situated within its Municipal limits and to declare that disposal of S. No. 1-4-1 and other plots by the Government in favour of Jawaharlal nehru Education Institute and Washermen of Porbandar is illegal and without any authority of law. ( 2 ) THE Government of Saurashtra, by a Notification dated 3/07/1950, issued in exercise of the powers under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 50 of the Bombay district Municipal Act, 1901, as adapted and applied to the State of Saurashtra, declared that all vacant unsold plots of land measuring 500 sq. yards or less between the houses and abutting on roads and situated within the limits of the Municipalities mentioned in the Schedule to the said notification, shall not be reserved by the Government. By the said notification, the Government also declared that such vacant unsold plots shall vest in and belong to the municipalities. By a subsequent Notification dated 24/06/1955, issued under Sec. 50 of the Act, the Government transferred to Porbandar municipality all vacant plots situated within the limits of the said Municipality and belonging to the Government, except the plots which were reserved for local public purposes and which were described in the Schedule appended thereto. Thereafter on 7/09/1970 the Government of Gujarat passed a resolution with respect to the disposal of lands of survey numbers and kharaba numbers situated within the municipal limits of the Municipalities of Saurashtra area. By the said resolution, it was pointed out to all the municipalities of Saurashtra area that the correct legal position under the Act and the aforesaid two notifications was that the lands of Government survey number and Government Kharaba numbers would not be called plots and they were not vested in the Municipalities under the aforesaid Government of Saurashtra notifications. This resolution was withdrawn by the Government by passing another resolution on 17-1-1980. This resolution was withdrawn by the Government by passing another resolution on 17-1-1980. In view of the aforesaid notifications and the resolutions passed by the Government of Gujarat on 17-1-1980, it is contended by the petitioner that all open plots, including survey numbers and Kharaba lands belonging to the Government, except those which are specifically reserved, vest in and belong to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner alone has a right to dispose them of by sale, lease, etc. , and neither the Collector nor the State Government has power to do so. It is further contended that in spite of this correct legal position, the State Government and the Collector have disposed of three plots, as stated above, and are also trying to dispose of more plots, even though they have no authority to do so. ( 3 ) ON the other hand what is contended by the learned Assistant Government pleader appearing for the State is that open plots of land, including survey numbers and Kharabas belonging to the Government, though vested in the petitioner- municipality, do not vest in the Municipality absolutely and, therefore, it is open to the Government to dispose of those plots and even to resume the same. ( 4 ) IN this case, I am not concerned with the power of the State Government to resume such plots and therefore, I am not dealing with the said aspect. Only question which is required to be considered is whether the petitioner, or the state Government, and its officers, have the right to dispose of such plots either by way of sale, lease, etc. The answer to the question, obviously, depends upon the true interpretation of the aforesaid notifications issued by the Saurashtra government. ( 5 ) THOSE notifications, as stated earlier, were issued under Sec. 50 of the act, as adapted and applied to the State of Saurashtra. The relevant part of sec. 50, as it stood then, read as under :"50. (1) Every Municipality may acquire and hold property both movable and immovable, whether within or without the limits of the Municipal district. The relevant part of sec. 50, as it stood then, read as under :"50. (1) Every Municipality may acquire and hold property both movable and immovable, whether within or without the limits of the Municipal district. (2) All property of the nature hereinafter in this section specified, and not being specially reserved by the State Government, shall be vested in and belong to the municipality, and shall, together with all other property, of what nature or kind sover, not being specially reserved by the State Government, which may become vested in the Municipality, be under their direction, management and control, and shall be held and applied by them as trustees, subject to the provisions and for the purposes of this Act, that is to say - (a) to (f) xx xx". A bare reading of this section makes it clear that the vesting which is contemplated by this section is for the purpose of management and control of the property so vested. The Municipality has to hold it and apply it as trustees of the same. Again, dealing with such property has to be subject to the provisions and for the purposes of the Act. At the relevant time sub-sec. (2) did not have the proviso, which was added in the year 1954, and which reads as follows :"provided that lands transferred to the Municipality by the State Government under clause (e) shall not, unless otherwise expressly provided in the instrument of transfer, belong by right of ownership to the Municipality but shall vest in them subject to the terms and conditions of the transfer, and on the breach of any of the said terms or conditions, the lands with all things attached thereto, including all fixtures and structures thereon, shall vest in the State Government and it shall be lawful for the State Government to resume possession thereof. "as the proviso was added subsequently, obviously, the rights of the parties in this case cannot be decided by reference to the same. The main part of subsec. (2) itself makes it clear that the Legislature did not intended the vesting to be absolute. The vesting contemplated by that sub-section is only for the purposes of direction, management and control. "as the proviso was added subsequently, obviously, the rights of the parties in this case cannot be decided by reference to the same. The main part of subsec. (2) itself makes it clear that the Legislature did not intended the vesting to be absolute. The vesting contemplated by that sub-section is only for the purposes of direction, management and control. Further limitation is put upon its power by providing that the Municipality shall hold and apply the same as trustees and that too in accordance with the provisions of the Act and for the purposes of the Act. In fact what the proviso now does is to bring out clearly the intention of the Legislature while enacting sub-sec. (2 ). ( 6 ) THE Notification of 1950 also makes it clear that the vacant unsold plots were vested in the Municipalities only for that limited purpose as can be gathered from the fact that it further provided that the plots were placed under the direction, management and control of the said Municipalities and were to be held and applied by the Municipalities as trustees thereof. The Notification of 1955 does not and could not have made any change in this position. Only change which it made was that whereas earlier, plots of land measuring 500 sq. yards or less were not to be reserved, after the said notification, all plots, irrespective of their size, stood transferred to the petitioner-Municipality, except the plots mentioned in the Schedule to that notification. ( 7 ) CONSIDERING the provisions of Sec. 50 of the Act and the two notifications, it will have to be held that all open plots of land situated within the municipal limits of petitioner-Nagarpalika vest in and belong to it and, therefore, it has a right to dispose of the same by sale, lease etc. , of course subject to the provisions and for the purposes of the Act. So long as they continue to vest in the petitioner-Municipality, neither the State government nor the Collector would have power to deal with such open plots of land. Therefore, even when the learned Assistant government Pleader is right in his submission that open plots of land situated within the municipal limits of the petitioner-Nagarpalika do not vest in it absolutely, his further submission that the Government and its officers have therefore, a right to dispose of such plots, cannot be accepted. Therefore, even when the learned Assistant government Pleader is right in his submission that open plots of land situated within the municipal limits of the petitioner-Nagarpalika do not vest in it absolutely, his further submission that the Government and its officers have therefore, a right to dispose of such plots, cannot be accepted. In this view of the matter the validity of the aforesaid three disposals made by the State Government or the Collector will have to be considered. As regards the disposal of 5106 sq. yards of land in favour of Jawaharlal nehru Education Institute, it cannot be disturbed as the same was made in the year 1971 and this petition has been filed in the year 1981. The sale made in favour of washermen of Porbandar, though made in the year 1981, has been made for a public purpose, and, therefore, it will not be proper now to declare the disposal of land as illegal. As regards the disposal of s. No. 10-4-1, as ordered by the Collector, it will have to be held that the decision taken by the Collector in this behalf is illegal being without any authority of law and, therefore, is of no effect. ( 8 ) IN the result, this petition is allowed. It is declared that open plots of land situated within the municipal limits of the petitioner-Nagarpalika, except those which are reserved, vest in and belong to the petitioner-Nagarpalika to the extent stated above and, therefore, so long as the said vesting continues neither the State Government nor its officers are empowered to deal with such plots. The State and its officers are, therefore, restrained from dealing with such plots so long as such plots continue to vest in and belong to the Municipality. The decision of the Collector to allot land bearing S. No. 10-4-1 to the persons illegally occupying the same is held to be bad and without any authority of law. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. .