Abstract
In an era of rapid urbanisation, comprehensive regional development, rather than a focus on a single urban area, is critical for meeting future needs. However, most states lack clarity in their Town and Country Planning legislation about the scope of regional planning and the power of regional planning authorities. This reflects a condition of uncertainty among the state's various planning authorities about their jurisdiction and responsibilities. The paper aims to compare the Karnataka TCP Act, 1961, to the TCP Acts of other states. It begins with a brief overview of the evolution of TCP Acts in India, followed by a comparison of the provisions of various state acts to know the distinction between them. The paper critiques the governance system established by the Karnataka TCP Act, 1961, based on its limited implementation. This also pertains to the act's departure from what it envisions for power decentralisation under the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992. The paper concludes by noting the fallacy and potential solutions in the act based on the best practices.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOWN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
