IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 24526 of 2009(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SRI.V.SHIVAPRASAD, MANAGING DIRECTOR, CONDOR BUILDERS PVT.LTD., T.C.NO.2/2421, CONDOR PLAZA, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY HIS POPWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH,GENERAL MANAGER (PROJECT CONDOR BUILDERS PVT.LTD.,PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL THOMAS, SMT.RASHMI.K.V. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVT. DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM. R1 TO R3 BY SPL. GOVT.PLEADER SRI. C.M. SURESH BABU, R4 BY SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2010, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 22857 OF 2010 THE COURT ON 09/02/2011 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.24526/2009-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DTD. 22/03/2006. EXT.P.1.A: COPY OF THE SITE PLAN, LOCATION PLAN AND AREA CALCULATION, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1B: COPY OF THE SUB BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.C: COPY OF THE BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.D: COPY OF THE GROUND FLOOR PLAN, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.E: COPY OF THE TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN (FLOORS I,II AND III) DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.F: COPY OF THE TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN (FLOORS IV AND V) DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.G: COPY OF THE CROSS SECTION AA. DTD. NIL. EXT.P.1.H: COPY OF THE ELEVATION, TERRACE FLOOR PLAN AND MACHINE ROOM PLAN, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REJECTION NOTICE NO.TPI/BA/1016/06 DTD. 24/05/2006 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PROPOSED USE MAP OF THE SANCTIONED MASTER PLAN, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE VARIATION OF THE GENERAL TOWN PLANNING SCHEME (MASTER PLAN) FOR TRIVANDRUM SANCTIONED VIDE G.O.(MS).NO.144/07/LSGD, DTD. 31/05/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE STRUCTURE PLAN (GENERAL TOWN PLANNING SCHEME) FOR CENTRAL CITY OF KOCHI, VIDE G.O.(MS).NO.143/07/LSGD DTD. 31ST MAY 2007. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE G.O.(MS).NO.174/92/LAD, DTD. 29/06/92 CONTAINING THE DTP SCHEME ALONG WITH THE PROPOSED LAND USE MAP. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 27/05/2006, WITHOUT ENCLOSURES. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.3. DTD. 30/05/2007. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.3. DTD. 23/12/2008 ALONG WITH SURVEY NUMBERS TO BE RETAINED AS GREEN STRIP. EXT.P.9.A: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D/1702/07, DTD. 05/01/2009 RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TOWN PLANNING OFFICE. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR LSGD, DTD. 11/02/2009 (WITHOUT ENCLOSURES). EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. DTD. 12/03/2009 (WITHOUT ITS ENCLOSURES). W.P.(C). NO.24526/2009-I: EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT. DEPARTMENT, DTD. 21/03/2009. EXT.P.12.A: COPY OF THE REPLY WAS RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R.3. ON 04/05/2009, NO.D/1702/07. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM THE R.3.NO.C1/11697/08, DTD. 13/05/2009. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE R.3, INFORMING REJECTION OF THE PETITIONER'S BUILDING CONSTRUCTION APPLICATION, DTD. 30/05/2009, NO.D3- 1343/2009. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 16/06/2009 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR LSGD (NO.MAL/03/2009). EXT.P.16: COPY OF THE EXISTING SCENARIO MAP OF THE DETAILED TOWN PLANNING SCHEME FOR PLAMOODU AREA, DTD. NIL. EXT.P.17: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN IN THE MONTH OF JUNE 2009 DETAILING THE NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EASTERN SIDE OF THE M.G. ROAD. EXT.P.18: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS (JUNE 2009) DETAILING THE NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WESTERN SIDE OF THE M.G. ROAD. EXT.P.19: COPY OF THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF LAND USE (EXISTING SCENARIO) JUNE 2009. EXT.P.20: COPY OF THE PROPOSED LAND USE MAP OF DTP SCHEME FOR PLAMOODU AREA (REVISED ON JUNE 2009). EXT.P.21: COPY OF THE REVISED ZONING REGULATIONS (PLAMOODU) TO BE ADOPTED BY THE CITY CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P.22: COPY OF THE REVISED SCHEDULE FOR LAND PROPOSED TO BE RESERVED (REVISED ON JUNE 2009) (FORM 10). EXT.P.23: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO THE R.1. DTD. 31/03/2009. EXT.P.24: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED TO THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3, DTD. 03/08/2009, WITHOUT ITS ENCLOSURES. EXT.P.25: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED TO THE R.4, DTD. 03/08/2009 WITHOUT ITS ENCLOSURES. EXT.P.26: COPY OF THE URBAN POLICY AND ACTION PLAN OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, PREPARED IN THE YEAR 2002. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) Nos. 24526/2009-I & 22857/2010-F - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011. JUDGMENT Important questions concerning the interpretation of Part IX-A of the Constitution of India, the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 and the Town Planning Act, 1939 arise in these two writ petitions. Since common questions arise, they have been heard together and are disposed of accordingly. W.P.(C) No.24526/2009 2. The issue raised herein pertains to the Town Planning Schemes for Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, especially the Plamoodu area. The petitioner is the owner of properties in Sy. Nos.2101/2.1.1, 2079/1, 2079/1- 1-1 of Kawdiar Village, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk. Ext.P1 series are the true copies of the applications for building permit, location plan, site plan, etc. which relate to the construction of a shopping mall comprising of 2 lakhs sq. ft. The Corporation rejected the application as per Ext.P2 order stating that the proposed site comes under the residential zone of the Government sanctioned General Town Planning Scheme (Master plan) for Thiruvananthapuram and also the property comes under the residential zone wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 2 of the Government sanctioned Detailed Town Planning Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the D.T.P. Scheme). The petitioner mainly contends that the Master plan for Thiruvananthapuram was notified and published in 1960 under Sections 7, 8 and 9 of the Town Planning Act 1939. The Scheme was sanctioned by the Government vide G.O.(Rt) No.921/71/LAD dated 21.6.1971 under Sections 10 to 12 of the said Act. Ext.P3 is the proposed land use map of the sanctioned master plan which was subsequently varied as per a notification of the year 1975 and sanction was accorded by the Government as per G.O.(Ms) No.99/76/LA SWD dated 27.4.1976. It was further varied in the year 2006 as per G.O.(MS) No.293/06/LSGD dated 23.12.2006. The said variation was sanctioned as per G.O.(MS) No.144/07/LSGD dated 31.5.2007, which is produced as Ext.P4. In these schemes, the petitioner's property remain as “residential”, whereas the area next to his property remain as “industrial zone”. Ext.P4 Zoning Regulations contains a restriction clause under para 14.3(iv) to the effect that “the provisions of Detailed Town Planning Schemes or Area Development Plans if any will prevail over these regulations.” Thus, the relaxation granted in the residential area for mixed use on a land at a depth of 50 meters prescribed in the varied scheme is not available to Plamood wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 3 area. It is pointed out that the respondents have published a more liberalised scheme as far as Kochi city is concerned, as per Ext.P5 in the year 2007. 3. The D.T.P. Scheme of Plamoodu came into existence as notified under Section 12 of the Town Planning Act, 1939 by G.O.(MS) No.174/92/LAD dated 29.6.1992 (Ext.P6). In an attempt to enlighten the respondents of the necessity to amend the zoning regulations in respect of the area and to provide it as a mixed use area, the petitioner has been moving the third respondent as per Exts.P7 to P9 objections and letters. He moved the Government also by Exts.P10, P11 and P12 and Exts.P13 and P14 are the replies given to the effect that these objections will be considered at the time of revision of the D.T.P. Scheme. The petitioner thereafter undertook the task of preparing an existing scenario map for a D.T.P. Scheme in the area and Exts.P16 to P18 series are the relevant documents. Ext.P19 is a comparative table prepared. This was followed by Exts.P20 and P22 and the petitioner moved the Government under Sections 7, 13 and 35 of the Town Planning Act for considering them, but without any result. It is in these circumstances the writ petition has been filed. W.P.(C) NO.22857/2010 4. The first petitioner is a builder and second petitioner is the owner wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 4 of property wherein a hospital was functioning. The hospital was shifted to a more convenient area in the year 2007 and according to the petitioners, for the philanthropic activities of the hospital, so as to raise funds they thought of constructing a commercial building in the property measuring 67.38 cents which is situated on the western side of Shornur road where the hospital was functioning. Going by the zoning regulations, the area is known as “public and semi public zone”. Ext.P1 is the application for building permit which was accompanied by Exts.P1(a) to P1(h) documents. The Corporation rejected it by Ext.P2 communication by stating that the area is coming under the “public and semi public zone” as per the Detailed Town Planning Scheme for existing Shornur Road. The General Town Planning Scheme for Thrissur Town was prepared in 1960 and was got sanctioned on 21.6.1971 as per Ext.P3, wherein also the zone is classified as “public and semi public”. It was revised as per Ext.P3(a), viz. G.O.(Ms) No.123/08/LSGD dated 28.4.2008. The said revised Scheme provided for mixed land use in 'residential' as well as 'public and semi public' and 'industrial zones', which enables the second petitioner to have commercial construction upto a depth of 100 meters. The Detailed Town Planning wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 5 Scheme for existing Shornur road is produced as Ext.P4 which was notified in the year 1990 as per Ext.P4(a) notification. The mixed use permitted therein is except for the categories falling under “public and semi public” and “industrial”. This was relied upon to reject the application of the second petitioner as per Ext.P2. Thus, they could not get the benefit of the relaxed provisions under the General Town Planning Scheme. Representations were filed before respondents 2 to 4 as Exts.P5 to P5(b), followed by reminders Exts.P5(c) to P5(e). The petitioners have produced various documents as Exts.P6 to P9(a) to show the present non residential developments on the eastern side of existing Shornur Road DTP Scheme. According to them, they had requested for a revision of the DTP Scheme as per Exts.P10 and P11 contending that the existing DTP Scheme has become obsolete. Failing to get any action in the matter, this writ petition has been filed. The petitioners have also produced Ext.P12 which is a copy of the Urban Policy and Action Plan for Kerala published in the year 2002 in tune with the policy of the National Commission on Urbanisation and the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act. 5. The reliefs claimed in these writ petitions are mainly to quash the General Town Planning Scheme and the D.T.P. Schemes produced in the wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 6 respective writ petitions, to declare that the provisions of Sections 3 and 11 of the Town Planning Act, 1939 are inconsistent with Part IX-A of the Constitution of India and Chapter IV of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. Section 51(4) of the Municipality Act, 1994 and the orders refusing sanction are also under challenge. Consequential reliefs have also been sought for. 6. Heard Shri Anil Thomas and Smt.Rashmi K.V., learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri C.M. Suresh Babu, learned Govt. Pleader, Shri N. Nandakumara Menon, learned Senior Counsel and Shri P.K.Manojkumar, learned counsel appearing for Thiruvananthapuram Corporation and Shri K.B. Mohandas, learned counsel appearing for Thrissur Corporation. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners Shri Anil Thomas exhaustively covered the background of the Constitution Seventy Fourth Amendment Act, which introduced Part IX-A dealing with Municipalities, the provisions of the Municipality Act, 1994 and the Town Planning Act, 1108 ME (1939). It is pointed out that the whole concept with regard to Urban Planning and Town Planning is laid down in the Constitution itself and Article 243 ZF allows continuance of existing laws which is inconsistent with it until amended or repealed by a competent Legislature or until the expiration of one year from the commencement of the Constitution 74th wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 7 Amendment Act, 1992, whichever is earlier. It is pointed out that that the Twelfth schedule of the Constitution contains 18 subjects, of which the first three items relate to comprehensive urban and town planning as well as planning for economic and social development. It is further pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that going by the provisions of the Constitution, it can be seen that spatial planning will have to be dealt with by the ward level committees of Municipalities, respective Standing Committees and the District Planning Committees upto the State Level Development Council for finalisation. Effective participation of the representatives of the people from the elected bodies and members from State legislature and the Parliament are also envisaged. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this is in contra distinction to the top-down approach made in the Town Planning Act, 1939. It is pointed out that in tune with the Constitutional scheme, the legislature herein has enacted the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 to replace the earlier enactments which were in conflict with Part IX-A of the Constitution. It is pointed out that even a reading of the preamble will show that it was brought to entrust such Municipalities with the functions of the preparation of plans and implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 8 including the implementation of schemes in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution which is in tune with the decentralisation of powers and for participation of people in a great measure. The objects and reasons of the Constitutional Amendment Act 1992 and the statement of objects and reasons of the Municipality Act, 1994 emphasise the fact that Local Self Government Institutions like the Municipalities and Municipal Corporations will be involved in scientific spatial planning and different committees are involved in the matter. By referring to various provisions of the Municipality Act with regard to the formation of Ward Committees, its functions, Standing Committees, etc. in Local Self Government Institutions, it is pointed out that the framers of the Act brought into effect XIIth Schedule of the Constitution by providing the First Schedule, in the Municipality Act, and item 30 which specifically deals with preparation of detailed Town Planning Scheme and its implementation in a phased manner. 8. It is pointed out that Town Planning Act is obsolete, that it goes against the philosophy of the Constitution and thus cannot survive in the light of Article 243-ZF. It is also pointed out that the provisions of the Town Planning Act with regard to the General Town Planning Scheme and wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 9 Detailed Town Planning Scheme are inconsistent with Part IX-A of the Constitution of India. They are inconsistent with the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 and therefore the later law, viz. the Municipality Act alone will prevail. The provisions of the Municipality Act should be interpreted in a wide manner as it draws inspiration from the provisions of the Constitution itself. It is pointed out that the subject matter dealt with in the Town Planning Act has got only a limited scope as compared to the provisions of Part IX-A of the Constitution and the Municipality Act, 1994. It is also contended that the impugned orders affects the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Articles, 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It is further pointed out that the town planning envisaged under the Municipality Act will involve schemes for development plans for the entire District and the Government has initiated steps in that line. As per the Govt. Order dated 1.8.2003 the Government has entrusted the District Planning Committee of Kollam District to prepare the Integrated District Development Plan for Kollam. This will fortify the argument of the petitioners that the Town Planning Act has become obsolete. It is further pointed out that as far as preparation and finalisation of the Scheme under it are concerned, participation of the people's wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 10 representative is minimal and it gives a major role for the Government and since the Constitution as well as the Municipalities Act provides the contrary scheme, the provisions under the Town Planning Act cannot survive. 9. Referring to the specific definitions of “development plan” contained in the Explanation to Section 51(2) of the Act, 1994 and that is contained in Rule 2(1)(w) of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, it is contended that the definition under the Rules run contrary to the provisions of the Act and therefore it cannot survive. It is also submitted that the variation of the General Town Planning Scheme brought into effect within the two Corporation limits in the years 2007-2008 also cannot survive as they are prepared under the Town Planning Act, 1939. It was alternatively pointed out that the maximum land use permitted under the revised General Town Planning scheme should get precedence over the detailed town planning schemes which have not been revised for decades by taking into consideration the development in the locality concerned. 10. By referring to various documents and the schemes prepared with regard to Plamoodu in Thiruvananthapuram and Shornur Road in Thrissur Corporation it is submitted that there had not been any proper adherence to wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 11 the scheme at any point of time, mixed use has been permitted extensively and plans prepared by the petitioner will show the same It is therefore submitted that the view taken by the respective Corporations with regard to the applications submitted by the petitioners for building permit is without referring to the various schemes extensively. 11. First I will consider the impact of Part IX-A of the Constitution, itself. Constitutional Scheme: Part IX-A of the Constitution was introduced as “Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992. It was brought into effect since it was felt that the urban local bodies are not able to perform effectively as vibrant democratic units of self Government. In the light of the inadequacies it was considered necessary that provisions relating to urban local bodies are incorporated in the Constitution itself to have an effective functioning. Para 3 of the statement of objects and reasons covers various matters on which the provisions were sought to be introduced in the Constitution itself. Clause (g) is important for our purpose which is reproduced below: “(g) devolution by the State Legislature of powers and wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 12 responsibilities upon the Municipalities with respect to preparation of plans for economic development and social justice, and for the implementation of development schemes as may be required to enable them to function as institutions of self-government.” 12. A reading of Part IX-A will show that a specific definition for Municipality has been introduced in Article 243-P(e). Article 243 provides that there shall be constituted in every State: (a) a Nagar Panchayat for a transitional area, that is to say, an area in transition from a rural area to an urban area; (b) a Municipal Council for a smaller urban area; and © a Municipal Corporation for a larger urban area, in accordance with the provisions of the said part. They have to be notified by the Governor under Article 243-Q (2) by which they will become Constitutional Institutions. Article 243-R provides for composition of Municipalities. Article 243-S provides for constitution and composition of Ward Committees. The next important article is Article 243-W which confers “powers, authority and responsibilities of Municipalities, etc.” and it reads as follows: “243-W. Powers, authority and responsbilities of Municipalities, etc.-- Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, endow.- (a) the Municipalities with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self- wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 13 government and such law may contain provisions for the devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Municipalities, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with respect to.- (i) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice; (ii) the performance of functions and the implementation of schemes as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule; (b) the Committees with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to carry out the responsibilities conferred upon them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule.” Going by clauses (i) and (ii) it can be seen that the Municipalities can be entrusted by law with the responsibilities for the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice and the performance of functions and the implementation of schemes as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule. Items (1) and (2) in Twelfth Schedule are “Urban Planning including town planning” and “Regulation of land use and construction of buildings”. Article 243-ZD provides for constitution of Committee for district planning and clauses (1) provides as follows: wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 14 “(1) There shall be constituted in every State at the district level a District Planning Committee to consolidate the plans prepared by the Panchayats and the Municipalities in the district and to prepare a draft development plan for the district as a whole.” It is specified in clause (2) of Article 243-ZD that “the Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to the composition of the District Planning Committees and other matters specified. Clause (3) is important for our purpose which reads as follows: “(3) Every District Planning Committee shall, in preparing the draft development plan.- (a) have regard to- (i) matters of common interest between the Panchayats and the Municipalities including spatial planning, sharing of water and other physical and natural resources, the integrated development of infrastructure and environmental conservations; (ii) the extent and type of available resources whether financial or otherwise; (b) consult such institutions and organisations as the Government may, by order, specify.” The important item 'spatial planning' is therefore emphasised therein to be included in the draft development plan. Article 243-ZE provides for Committee for Metropolitan planning and the preparation of draft development plan for the Metropolitan area as a whole. Clause (3) therein wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 15 reads as follows: “(3) Every Metropolitan Planning Committee shall, in preparing the draft development plan: (a) have regard to.- (i) the plans prepared by the Municipalities and the Panchayats in the Metropolitan area; (ii) matters of common interest between the Municipalities and the Panchayats, including co-ordinated spatial planning of the area, sharing of water and other physical and natural resources, the integrated development of infrastructure and environmental conservation; (iii) the overall objectives and priorities set by the Government of India and the Government of the State; (iv) the extent and nature of investment likely to be made in the Metropolitan area by agencies of the Government of India and of the Government of the State and other available resources whether financial or otherwise. (b) consult such institutions and organisations as the Governor may, by order, specify.” Therein also it can be noticed that matters include co-ordinated spatial planning of the area. Article 243ZF relates to Continuation of existing laws and Municipalities. It reads as follows: “243-ZF. Continuance of existing laws and Municipalities.-- Notwithstanding anything in this Part, any provisions of any law wpc 24526/2009 & 22857/2010 16 relating to Municipalities in force, in a State immediately before the commencement of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, which is inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall continue to be in force until amended or repealed by competent Legislature or other competent authority or until the expiration