BANGALORE – 560 001 v. (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIYAPPA, AGA)

Judgment

#3. SHANKAR DONGRE S/O LATE LAKSHMAN BHAT DONGRE AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.47, SAMRUDDHI MEHI ENCLAVE, VEERASAGARA ROAD, NEAR AIRTEL TOWER DODDABETTAHALLI, BANGALORE – 560 097. ASHOK GOGATE S/O SRI VINAYAKA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.3, NANDANA MEHI ENCLAVE, VEERASAGARA ROAD, DODDABETTAHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE 560 097. PRASHANTH A ATHAVALE AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, C/O ARUN RAO, NO.8 MEHI ENCLAVE, MAHATMA GANDHI LAYOUT, VEERASAGARA ROAD, DODDABETTAHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE 560 097.

#4. RAM KUMAR SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O MADHO SHARMA, R/AT NO.12, TARKESHI BHAVAN, MEHI ENCLAVE, MAHATMA GANDHI LAYOUT, B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR VEERASAGARA ROAD, DODDABETTAHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE 560097

#6. PRAVEEN KUMAR M AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O K MADHAVA RAO, NO.24, MEHI ENCLAVE, SOMESHWARA CONCRETE BLOCK, DODDABETTAHALLI, VIDYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE – 560 097. PRAVEENA K AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O KRISHNAPPA NO.25, 3RD MAIN ROAD, MEHI ENCLAVE, NEAR MAHATMA GANDHI LAYOUT, DODDABETTAHALLI, BANGALORE 560 097.

#7. MANOJ KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O SUDARSANAM, R/AT NO.15, 3RD MAIN ROAD, MEHI ENCLAVE, VEERASAGARA ROAD, DODDABETTAHALLI, BANGALORE 560 097.

SRI PRASHANTH THAMANKAR S/O SRI RAMAKRISHNA THAMANKAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, NO.22, KAPILA, MEHI ENCLAVE, VEERASAGARA ROAD DODDABETTAHALLI, BANGALORE – 560 097. (BY SRI. SANDEEP LAHIRI.,ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001. …PETITIONERS - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR

#3. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SANKEY ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE 560 020 REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (DEVELOPMENT TAX) (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIYAPPA, AGA) …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO QUASH THE DIGITALLY SIGNED DEMAND NOTICES ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AS ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY WHICH ARE DETAILED AS UNDERA) BEARING DATED DEMAND NO.ULD2403AA338XXA03339 NO.3 ISSUED DEMANDING PAYMENT OF RS.9,66,000/- TOWARDS BETTERMENT CHARGES WITH RESPECT TO HOUSE IN SITE NO.47, SITUATED AT SY.NO.23, DODDABETTAHALLI HAVING RC NO.2293 AND JCC NO.JCC-16- 0576 ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER NO.1 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. RESPONDENT

12.01.2026 NOTICE BY THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs: “i. Issue Writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to quash the digitally signed demand notices issued by the Respondent No.3 as illegal and arbitrary which are detailed as under: - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR issued a) Demand Notice dated 12.01.2026 bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03339 Respondent No.3 towards betterment charges with Rs.9,66,000/- respect to House in Site No.47, situated at Sy.No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.2293 and JCC No.JCC-16-0576 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.1 (Annexure A); demanding payment issued b) Demand bearing Notice dated 08.01.2026 No.ULD2403AA338XXA03289 Respondent No.3 Rs.9,66,000/- towards betterment charges with respect to House in Site No.3, situated at Sy. No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.2919 and JCC No.JCC-16-04945 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.2 (Annexure A1); demanding payment ULD2403AA338XXA00378 demanding c) Demand Notice dated 22.08.2025 bearing No. Respondent No.3 towards betterment charges with Rs.9,66,000/- respect in Site No.8, situated at Sy.No.662/08, Doddabettahalli having RC No.530 and JCC No.JCC-16-01126 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.3 (Annexure A2); issued payment to House issued d) Demand Notice dated 01.01.2026 bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03123 Respondent No.3 Rs.9,66,000/- towards betterment charges with respect to House in Site No.12, situated at Sy.No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.1907 and JCC No.JCC-16-01390 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.4 (Annexure A3); demanding payment issued e) Demand Notice dated 21.08.2025 bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA00262 Respondent No.3 towards betterment charges with Rs.9,78,880/- respect to House in Site No.24, situated at Sy. No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.2278 and JCC No.JCC-16-00785 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.5 (Annexure A4); demanding payment f) Demand bearing 12.01.2026 dated Notice towards betterment charges with No.ULD2403AA338XXA03347 Respondent No.3 Rs.6,40,780/- demanding payment issued - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR respect to House in Site No.25, situated at Sy.No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.4023 and JCC No.JCC-16-06103 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.6 (Annexure A5); issued g) Demand Notice bearing 08.01.2026 dated No.ULD2403AA338XXA03172 Respondent No.3 Rs.14,00,700/- towards betterment charges with respect to House in Site No.15, situated at Sy.No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.2264 and JCC No.JCC-16-03037 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.7 (Annexure A6); demanding payment issued h) Demand Notice dated 12.01.2026 bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03394 Respondent No.3 Rs.9,17,700/- towards betterment charges with respect to House in Site No.22, situated at Sy.No.23, Doddabettahalli having RC No.4021 and JCC No.JCC-16-06764 issued in favour of the Petitioner No.8 (Annexure A7); demanding payment ii. Issuance of Writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the Respondents to consider the objections of Petitioners to demand of the Respondent No.3 for payment of Betterment charges which are detailed as under: a) Objection dated 29.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.1 with the Respondent No.2 to the demand bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03339 (Annexure B);

12.01.2026 notice b) Objection dated 29.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.2 with the Respondent No.2 to the bearing demand No.ULD2403AA338XXA03289 (Annexure B1);

08.01.2026 notice c) Objection dated 08.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.3 with the Respondent No.2 to the bearing demand No.ULD2403AA338XXA00378 (Annexure B2);

22.08.2025 notice d) Objection dated 29.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.4 with the Respondent No.2 to the - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR demand notice dated 01.01.2026 bearing No. ULD2403AA338XXA03123 (Annexure B3); e) Objection dated 08.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.5 with the Respondent No.2 to the demand bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA00262 (Annexure B4);

21.08.2025 notice f) Objection dated 11.03.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.6 with the Respondent No.2 to the demand bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03347 (Annexure B5);

12.01.2026 notice g) Objection dated 31.03.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.7 with the Respondent No.2 to the demand bearing No.ULD2403AA338XXA03172 (Annexure B6);

08.01.2026 notice h) Objection dated 09.04.2026 filed by the Petitioner No.8 with the Respondent No.2 to the demand 12.01.2026 No.ULD2403AA338XXA03394 (Annexure B7); bearing notice iii. Issuance of Writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to quash the Resolution dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Respondent 2 bearing No.67/24 as arbitrary (Annexure C); iv. Issue any other appropriate or direction as deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.”

#2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and perused the material on record.

#3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Muniakkayyamma Vs. State of Karnataka and others – W.P.No.9131/2026 and connected matters, dated 21.04.2026, in order to contend that the present petition deserves to be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid decision.

#4. Per contra, learned AGA for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

#5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Muniakkayyamma Vs. State of Karnataka and others – W.P.No.9131/2026 and connected matters, dated 21.04.2026, which reads as under: “Petitioners in all these petitions have sought for setting aside of the resolution as regards Subject Number 67/2024 dated 07.03.2024. Petitioners have also sought for setting aside of the demand notices.

#2. It is the case of the petitioners that insofar as fixation of betterment tax, petitioners have made out - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR representations making out grounds as regards objections with respect to the fixation of betterment tax.

#3. The details of demand notices as well as the representations / objections made as regards levy of betterment tax are depicted in the table below: W.P.No. Objections/ Representations Annexures-C1 to C3 Annexure-J Annexures-C1 to C9 Annexure-C Annexure-C Annexures-D & F Annexues-D and E 4. Annexures-C and D Annexure-C Annexure-C Impugned demand notices Annexures-B1 to B3 Annexues-B F Annexures-B1 to B9 Annexure-B Annexure-B Annexures-B and C Annexures-B and C Annexure-B Annexure-B Annexure-B It is the further case of the petitioners that if an assessment as regards betterment tax is made and the petitioners are not agreeable and file objections, then the respondent - BDA in terms of Section 21(4) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 is required to make a reference to the District Court for determining betterment tax payable by such persons.

#5. Accordingly, it is submitted that in light of the objections raised by the petitioners in terms of their objections as mentioned in the table supra, respondent - BDA ought to have referred it to the District court and could not have raised demand and sought to enforce such demand as against the petitioners. - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR

#6. Sri. Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 in all these matters submit insofar representations/objections, the same would be considered and appropriate decision would be taken as regards such objections. It is further submitted that they would keep in mind the provisions of Section 21(4) of the BDA Act as a consequence of not accepting the objections if such conclusion is arrived at.

#7. In light of the same, the demand notices in all the petitions are set aside. The respondent - BDA is directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders and if respondent - BDA does not uphold the objections of the petitioners, necessary steps to be taken in terms of Section 21(4) of the Act. Accordingly, petitions are disposed of. All contentions on merits are kept open.”

#6. The aforesaid decision is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and consequently, the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, referred to supra.

#7. In the result, I pass the following: - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:24776 WP No. 15361 of 2026 HC-KAR ORDER (i) The petition is disposed of in terms of the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Muniakkayyamma Vs. State of Karnataka and others – W.P.No.9131/2026 and connected matters, dated 21.04.2026. (ii) The impugned demand notices at Annexures-A and A1 to 7 are hereby set aside. (iii) The respondent-BDA is directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders and if respondent-BDA does not uphold the objections of the petitioners, necessary steps to be taken in terms of Section 21(4) of the BDA Act. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 121