STATE OF RAJASTHAN versus ASHOK KHETOLIYA & ANR

Citation: [2022] 2 S.C.R. 777 · Decided: 10-03-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HEMANT GUPTA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
777
[2022] 2 S.C.R. 777
777
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
v.
ASHOK KHETOLIYA & ANR
(Civil Appeal No. 1814 of 2022)
MARCH 10, 2022
[HEMANT GUPTA AND V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ]
Constitution of India: Arts.243Q(2), 243ZF, Constitution
(Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 – Part IXA – Legislative
Competence with respect to Urban Local Bodies – Appellant-State
issued a notification declaring Gram Panchayat Roopbas, District
Bharatpur as Municipal Board – The said notification was
challenged on the ground that the same was ultra-vires as no
notification was made public as contemplated under Art.243Q(2) –
High Court accepted the challenge and held that declaration by
the State was beyond its legislative competence – Held: Art.243ZF
of the Constitution mandates the State legislature to amend the State
Laws to make them in conformity with Part IXA – When Part IXA
was introduced, the Parliament was aware that the competent
legislature to legislate on the subject of the Urban Local Bodies
was the State Legislature but Part IXA gave constitutional status to
the Municipalities and therefore the State were put under
constitutional obligation to adopt Municipalities – Local Government
falls in Entry 5 List II of Seventh Schedule therefore state legislature
alone is competent to legislate in respect of municipalities provided
the same is not inconsistent with Part IXA – The scheme of Part IXA
does not contemplate separate notification under Art.243 Q and if
the notification is issued as per the Municipality Act enacted by the
State which is not inconsistent with Art.243Q, then it fulfills the
constitutional requirement and the same cannot be held to be ultra-
vires solely on the basis that the notification was not published under
Art.243Q(2) – Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009.
Constitution (Seventy Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992: Part IXA
– Object of introducing Part IXA in the Constitution – Held: Objects
and reasons of introducing Part IXA were that local bodies had
become weak and ineffective on account of variety of reasons such
as failure to hold regular elections, prolonged supersessions and
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
778
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 2 S.C.R.
inadequate devolution of powers and functions – The Urban Local
Bodies were also not able to perform effectively as vibrant democratic
units of self-government – Therefore, when Part IXA was introduced,
Parliament was aware that the competent legislature to legislate on
the subject of the Urban Local Bodies was the State legislature but
Part IXA of the Constitution had given constitutional status to the
Municipalities – The States were put under constitutional obligation
to adopt Municipalities as per systems enshrined in the Constitution
– Constitution of India.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. Article 243ZF of the Constitution mandated that
any provision of any law 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 Part IXA shall continue to be in force until
amended or repealed by a competent Legislature or any other
competent authority or until the expiration of one year from such
commencement whichever is earlier. Therefore, Article 243ZF
of the Constitution is in the context of mandating the State
Legislature to amend the State laws to be in conformity with Part
IXA of the Constitution. The objects and reasons of introducing
Part IXA in the Constitution were that local bodies had become
weak and ineffective on account of variety of reasons such as
failure to hold regular elections, prolonged supersessions and
inadequate devolution of powers and functions. The Urban Local
Bodies were also not able to perform effectively as vibrant
democratic units of self-government. Therefore, when Part IXA
was introduced, Parliament was aware that the competent
legislature to legislate on the subject of the Urban Local Bodies
was the State legislature but Part IXA of the Constitution had
given constitutional status to the Municipalities. The States were
put under constitutional obligation to adopt Municipalities as per
systems enshrined in the Constitution. [Paras 3, 4][783-D-E; 784-
A-C]
2. The High Court has misread the scope of Part IXA of
the Constitution and Article 243Q of the Constitution
contemplating that the transitional area has to be notified under
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
779
such provision. The scheme of the Constitutional Amendment is
not to take

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.