Judgment : In this writ petition, the petitioner is the Secretary and Correspondent of the Nadar Middle school, Mavilathoppu, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram District, seeks for a direction to the respondents to remove the corpse buried in the play ground belonging to the School on 13.3.2005 and further to prevent the 4th respondent from burying or burning corpses in the School premises in future. 2. The petitioner claims that the Nadar Middle School was a recognised private school governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 and the school has got a building and a play ground. According to the petitioner, the play ground is situated in Survey No. 138/10-A and 138/10-B of Keelakarai. It is also stated by the petitioner that in the northern side of the Village, there is a regular burning and burial ground, which has been used for 10 years and the Village Panchayat of Mavilathoppu has approved the said burial and burning ghat and it is maintained by the Village Panchayat. 3. However, according to the petitioner, the 4th respondent had buried his wife after her death, in the school play ground on 13.2.2005 and there was a protest from the public about the said burial. In view of the same, the children are not willing to use the play ground and representations have been sent to the authorities in this regard. 3. This writ petition was admitted on 11.7.2005 and in W.P.M.P. (MD) No. 6292 of 2005, this Court granted an interim injunction on 25.11.2005 from using the said land as a burial ground till the disposal of the writ petition. 4. After notice in the writ petition, the second respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer has filed a detailed counter and the 4th respondent also had filed a counter affidavit. 5. The4th respondent contended that the property which the petitioner stakes claim to the school and that it was being used as a play ground in Survey Nos. 138/10-A and 138/10-B of Keelakarai Village, do not belong to the School. The play ground is situated only in Survey No. 138/5. 5. The4th respondent contended that the property which the petitioner stakes claim to the school and that it was being used as a play ground in Survey Nos. 138/10-A and 138/10-B of Keelakarai Village, do not belong to the School. The play ground is situated only in Survey No. 138/5. In fact, the two survey numbers mentioned by the petitioner belonged to the 4th respondents brother, Chinnasamy Nadar who purchased it by way of two sale deeds dated 28.7.1970 and 4.9.1972 and ever since his purchase, the said property was in his possession and subsequent to the death of Chinnasamy Nadar, a Will was executed in favour of R.A. Ramamurthy and he is in possession and enjoyment of the said property. 6. With reference to burial of dead bodies in the Village, it was stated that it was an age old practice of the villagers to bury it in private lands and there had been burials before the 4th respondents wife got buried. There has been several earlier occasions, bodies of dead persons, who were related to the 4th respondent had been buried in the said site. 7. The Revenue Divisional Officer/ 2nd respondent by his counter affidavit categorically held that the property does not belong to the School and there is no play ground in the said land and the two survey numbers in question is only a private land. About the practice of burying dead persons in the private land, in para 5 of the counter affidavit, the second respondent has listed out a number of burials, which took place in the said land. He also stated that the writ petitioner has filed a petition before him and he had granted an order of interim injunction by his proceedings dated 29.3.2005 restraining the 4th respondent from entering into the suit property and later it was vacated on 6.5.2005. 8. What is highly objectionable is that the 2nd respondents inaction in allowing burials in a private patta lands contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds)Rules of 1999 read with Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act. In the counter affidavit, there is no reference to any legal provisions noted by the second respondent. The counter affidavit proceeds on the private notions of the officer. In the counter affidavit, there is no reference to any legal provisions noted by the second respondent. The counter affidavit proceeds on the private notions of the officer. His statement that it was the practice of burying and burning dead persons in the private lands appears to be a disguised approval to such actions notwithstanding the fact the said issue is covered by statutory enactments, which is binding on all including the second respondent. The second respondents counter affidavit proceeds on total ignorance of legal provisions in this regard. 9. Under Section 116 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, it is the duty of the Panchayats to provide burial and burning grounds subject to the rules made in this behalf. The Government of Tamil Nadu by G.O. Ms. No. 213, Rural Development (C-4), dated 5.10.1999 have framed the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules of 1999. Rules 5 and 7 of the said rules read as follows: “5. Conditions for opening of burial and burning ground- (1) No new place for burying or burning the dead, whether private or public, shall be opened, formed, constructed or used, unless a licence has been obtained from the village panchayat on application.” “7. Place for burial and burning groundse(1) No person shall bury or burn or cause to be buried or burnt any corpse in any place within ninety metres of a dwelling place or source of drinking water-supply other than a place licenced as a burial and burning ground. (Rule 7(2) to 7(6) are omitted) (7) Whoever contravenes any of the provisions of these rules shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees or in case of a continuing breach, with fine not exceeding fifteen rupees for every day during which the breach, continues after conviction of the first breach:” 10. Rule 7(7) provides for penalty in case of contravention of the said rules. Under these circumstances, the assertions by the 4th respondent and the second respondent legalising the so called usual practice, is clearly in contravention of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 and the relevant rules made therein. 11. The prayer sought for removal of the corpse buried in the play ground of the school cannot be accepted because it has been held that the property in survey numbers in question does not belong to the School. 11. The prayer sought for removal of the corpse buried in the play ground of the school cannot be accepted because it has been held that the property in survey numbers in question does not belong to the School. If it had been used as a play ground by any custom, usage or title, it is for the petitioner school to institute appropriate suits and establish their title. 12. Withreference to the corpses already buried, the same thing cannot be removed at this juncture because the petitioner had slept over the matter over the years and woke up only after the burial of the deceased wife of the 4th respondent. Under the circumstances, the prayer to remove the corpses already buried does not arise. But the 4th respondent shall not allow the place open to skies and destroy by vagaries of weather but must cover it by appropriate structure. 13. However, this Court is of the view that, unless and until, a licence is granted in terms of Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Provision of Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1999, the property in survey numbers 138/10-A and 138/10-B cannot be used in future to bury any dead persons. If the 4th respondent indulges in burying/burning any dead person in the name of usual practice as defacto certified by the 2nd respondent, the District Collector/1st respondent shall take appropriate action against the offenders and they are directed to keep the property not to be used for the purpose of burying bodies of dead persons in the property in question. 14. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.