GOVINDA BHAT, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a resident of Chincholi Town in the district of Gulbarga. Chincholi Town Municipal Council was established under the Hydebad district Municipalities Act, 1956 which was in force in the Hyderabad area of the State. The Hyderabad Act, among other correspondng Acts in force in the different areas of the State, was repealed by the Mysore Municipalities act, 1964 which came into force on 1 4-1965. The population of the Chincholi Town, according to 1961 Census was 6,047. ( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner was that after the coming into force of the Mysore Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter called the Act') it has no legal existence and therefore, it has no competence to levy and collect octroi from the petitioner as per its notification dt. 30th January 1968 published in the Mysore Gazette dt. 7th March 1968. Therefore, he has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the 2nd respondent from levying or collecting octroi from the petitioner. ( 3 ) AFTER the Act came into force, the State Government have issued a notification dt. 29th March 1965 in exercise of the powers vested under sub-sec. (1) of S. 381 of the Act by which the Government have directed that the 2nd respondent shall, as from the date of the commencement of the act, become a Town Municipal Council competent to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred by the Act on Town Municipal Councils until the Town Municipal Councils or City Municipal Councils are duly constituted under the provisions of the Act. ( 4 ) THE case of the petitioner was that the population of Chincholi town, according to the last census being less than 10,000 it is not competent for the State Government to empower the continuation of the 2nd respondent as a Town Municipal Council competent to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred by the Act on Town Municipal Councils. Eeliance was placed on the provisions of sub-sec. (1) of S. 3 of the Act in support of this contention. Eeliance was placed on the provisions of sub-sec. (1) of S. 3 of the Act in support of this contention. The said sub-section provides:"that the Government, may, by notification declare any local area, which at the last preceding official census had a population of 50,000 or more to be a city municipality, and any local area, which at the last preceding official census had a population of more than 10,000 and less than 50,000 to be a town municipality. "there is a proviso to this section which empowers the Government in special circumstances to constitute a City Municipality or Town Municipality as the case may be where the above population qualification is not satisfied. The short answer to the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is, that sub-sec. (1) of S. 381 of the Act, which is a transitional provision, empowers the State Govt. by notification to direct any Town municipal Council or City Municipal Council functioning immediately before the commencement of the Act to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred by the Act on Town Municipal Councils or City Municipal Councils as the case may be until the Town Municipal Councils or City Municils are duly constituted under the provisions of the Act. In exercise of that power, the State Government have empowered the 2nd respondent to continue to exercise powers and perform the duties of a Town Municipal council. The only restriction on the exercise of that power is what is contained in the proviso to sub-sec. (1) of S. 381 of the Act. It is not the case of the petitioner that the said restriction has been contravened. In our opinion, the 2nd respondent is legally in existence and there is no substance in the contention urged on behalf of the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. --- *** --- .