Writ Petition No. 35443 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 35443 OF 2024 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 31213 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) IN WP No.35443/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SARITA BHANSALI W/O RAJENDRA BHANSALI, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 2. SRI. RAJENDRA BHANSALI, S/O SRI. DHANRAJ BHANSALI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.21 , FLAT NO.204, SILVER OAKS GARDEN APARTMENT, VITTAL MALYA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001. (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR .AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001 Digitally signed by PAVITHRA B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR 2. THE BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE – 560 002. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING(RAJAJESHWARI NAGAR), 18TH CROSS, IDEAL HOME LAYOUT, R.R .NAGAR, NEAR BESCOM OFFICE, BANGALORE – 560 098. …RESPONDENTS
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R3 (VK NOT FILED); SRI. BATHEGOWDA.K.V, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.BBMP/ADDL.COM/RJH/0617/24-25 IN PROJECT NO. PRJ/3022/24-25 DTD. 25.11.2024 AT ANNX-E AND E1 ISSUED BY THE R-3 IN SO FAR AS THE DEMAND OF RS.97,584/-, TOWARDS SCRUTINY FEE, LICENSE FEE OF RS. 19,51,690/- SECURITY DEPOSIT OF RS. 13,94,064/- GROUND RENT AND GST OF RS.18,09,495, LAKE REJUVENATION FEE OF RS.2,02,292/- FEE U/S 18(1) OF THE KTCP (BETTERMENT LEVY) FOR BUILDING RS.13,94,064, FEE U/S 18(1) JOF KTCP (BETTERMENT LEVY) FOR SITE 16,99,253 WATER SUPPLY CESS OF RS.3,09,332, RING ROAD SURCHARGE OF 3,09,332 AND CESS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SLUMS 1,54,666, MRTS SURCHARGES OF RS.15,46,658 AND PENALTY OF 23,00,205, 5 PERCENT ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGE TO BBMP ON CESS AND SURCHARGE 1,15,999/- LABOUR CESS AMOUNT OF RS.25,11,825-00. IN WP NO.31213/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAMUNA W/O LATE CHIKKASHAMMANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR R/AT WARD NO.85 MUNEKOLALU VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE – 560 048. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS.V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE N.R.SQURE BANGALORE – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING MAHADEVAPURA, RHB COLONY, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 048. (BY SRI.BOPANNA.B, AGA FOR R1; SRI.K.B.MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) ...RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE NO. BBMP/ADDL.COM/MDP/0710/24-25 DATED 13/11/2024 AT ANN-C AND ISSUED BY THE R3 IN SO FAR AS THE DEMAND OF RS.39,361/ TOWARDS SCRUTINY FEE, RS.7,87,218/- TOWARDS LICENSE FEE, RS.6,18,529/- TOWARDS GROUND RENT AND GST. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR RS.1,75,302/- TOWARDS SECURITY DEPOSIT, RS.86,272/- TOWARD LAKE REJUVENATION, FEE U/S 18(1) OF THE KTCP ACT (BUILDING) RS. 1,75,302 AND SITE RS. 27,67,261, TOWARDS RING ROAD SURCHARGE RS. 2,76,726 AND TOWARDS WATER SUPPLY CESS IS RS. 2,76,726, CESS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SLUMS RS. 1,38,363 AND MRTS SURCHARGE OF RS. 13,83,630 AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioners in W.P.No.35443/2024 have sought the following reliefs: a) to the quash demand in Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or notice direction No.BBMP/Addl.Com/RJH/0617/24-25 Project No PRJ/3022/24-25 dated 25/11/2024 at Annexure E & E1 issued by the respondent No.3 in so far as the demand of Rs.97,584/- towards Scrutiny Fee, License Fee of Rs 19,51,690/-, security deposit of Rs.13,94,064, Ground Rent & GST of Rs 18,09,495, Lake Rejuvenation Fee of Rs 2,02,292 Fee U/s 18(1) of KTCP (Betterment Levy) for Building Rs 13,94,064, Fee U/s 18(1) of KTCP (Betterment Levy) For Site 16,99,253 Water Supply Cess of Rs 3,09,332, Ring Road Surcharge of 3,09,332 and for Improvement of Slums 1,54,666, MRTS Cess Surcharge of Rs 15,46,658 & Penalty of 23,00,205, 5% Administrative Charge to BBMP on Cess and Surcharge 1,15,999/-Labour Cess amount of Rs 25,11,825-00. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring that Bye-law No.3.9 in the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws, 2003 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR framed under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act as unconstitutional, arbitrary, illegal and ultravires; c) Issue writ of mandamus or similar writ or order or direction directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to issue building plan and license pursuant to the demand notice No.BBMP/Addl.Com/RJH/0617/24-25 Project No PRJ/3022/24-25 dated 25/11/2024 at Annexure E & E1 issued by the respondent No.3 without insisting for payment of amount mentioned above. in d) Issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction deemed fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. Petitioner in W.P.No.31213/2024 has sought the following reliefs: a) to the quash demand Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction notice No.BBMP/Addl.Com/MDP/0710/24-25 dated 13/11/2024 at Annexure C issued by the respondent No.3 in so far as the demand of Rs.39,361/- towards Scrutiny Fee, Rs 7,87,218 towards License Fee, Rs.6,18,529/- towards Ground Rent & GST, Rs.1,75,302/- towards Security Deposit, Rs 86,272 toward Lake Rejuvenation, Fee U/s 18(1) of the KTCP Act (Building) Rs 1,75,302 & Site Rs 27,67,261, Towards Ring Road Surcharge Rs 2,76,726 and Towards Water Supply Cess is Rs 2,76,726, Cess For Improvement of Slums Rs 1,38,363 & MRTS surcharge of Rs 13,83,630. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring that Bye-law No.3.9 in the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws, 2003 framed under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act as unconstitutional, arbitrary, illegal and ultravires; c) Issue writ of mandamus or similar writ or order or direction directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to issue - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR building plan and license pursuant to the demand notice No.BBMP/Addl.Com/MDP/0710/24-25 dated 13/11/2024 at Annexure C issued by the respondent No.3 without insisting for payment of amount mentioned above. d) Issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction deemed fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that across the Bar, the issue is dealt by the Co-ordinate Bench in the reported judgment in W.P.No.23086/2022 and connected matters. The Co-ordinate Bench, while deciding the issue, has set-aside the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022) and the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023, (Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024). Therefore, this Court deems it fit to cull out the operative portion of the order, which reads as under; "ORDER
Decision
(i) The writ petitions are partly allowed. (ii) The Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR (Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022), is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023, (Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024), is hereby quashed and set aside. (iv) It is hereby declared that the provisions contained in Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, read with Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are applicable only in respect of ‘Development Plan’ containing the proposal for construction on plots measuring more than 20,000 square meters in extent and not in respect of plots measuring less than 20,000 square meters. (v) It is hereby declared that if fee has been earlier collected for change of land use or while approving a layout plan, fee shall not be collected for subsequent ‘Development Plan’ in terms of the ‘Note’ found below TABLE I of Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965. (vi) It is hereby declared that the linking of the fee leviable under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, to the ‘market value’ or ‘guidance value’ as determined under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, is illegal. However, liberty is reserved to the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR respondent-State Government and the BBMP to re-fix a standard after collecting empherical data. (vii) Consequently, all the impugned Circulars which seek to give effect to the Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are hereby quashed and set aside. (viii) It is hereby declared that Clause 3.8 of the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye- laws, 2003, providing for ‘Ground Rent’, is illegal and are accordingly quashed and set aside. (ix) Consequently, all the impugned Demand Notices raised by the respondent-BBMP, in respect of the writ petitioners herein are also quashed and set aside. It would be advisable that the BBMP may come out with a scheme for ‘One Time Settlement’ and settle the levy and collect the fee generally acceptable to the citizens of Bengaluru. This would also augment the present situation." 3. In the present writ petitions, the core issue raised stands substantially covered and decided by the authoritative pronouncement of the coordinate bench, wherein the writ petitions were partly allowed and several consequential reliefs were granted. The Hon’ble Court, in unequivocal terms, quashed and set aside the Karnataka - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Acts of 2021 and 2023 (Karnataka Act Nos.01 of 2022 and 37 of 2024 respectively). 4. The Court further declared that the provisions under Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, read with Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are applicable only to development proposals concerning plots exceeding 20,000 square meters, and not to smaller plots. Importantly, it was also held that if a fee has been previously collected for change of land use or approval of layout plan, no further fee shall be levied for subsequent development plans, in view of the explanatory 'Note' to Table I of Rule 37-A. 5. The Court declared illegal the linkage of such levies to market or guidance value under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, and consequently, quashed all Circulars and demand notices issued to give effect to such - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR unlawful interpretations. Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, imposing 'Ground Rent', was also struck down. 6. In view of these comprehensive declarations and findings, it is submitted that the controversy raised in the present writ petitions no longer survives for adjudication independently, as it is squarely covered by the binding judgment of the coordinate bench. In the light of the judgment rendered by the reported judgment substantially covering the issue, which is raised in the captioned writ petition, the writ petitions are liable to be allowed strictly aligning to the operative portion of the said writ petition. 7. In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petitions are allowed. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR IN W.P.No.35443/2024: ii. The impugned demand notice dated 25.11.2024 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-E & E1 is hereby set-aside. iii. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. iv. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to forthwith process the petitioners’ application seeking building license and sanction of the building plan, strictly in accordance with law. v. It is made clear that the issuance of the building license and approval plan shall not be withheld merely on the ground that the BBMP is contemplating to filing a writ appeal against the reported judgment. vi. If the building licence and sanction plan are issued, the same shall be subjected to the outcome of any appeal that may be filed by the BBMP against the judgment. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR IN W.P No. 31213/2024: i. The impugned demand notice dated 13.11.2024 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-C is hereby set-aside. ii. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. iii. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to forthwith process the petitioner's application seeking building license and sanction of the building plan, strictly in accordance with law. iv. It is made clear that the issuance of the building license and approval plan shall not be withheld merely on the ground that the BBMP is contemplating to filing a writ appeal against the reported judgment. v. If the building licence and sanction plan are issued, the same shall be subjected to the outcome of any appeal that may be filed by the BBMP against the judgment. - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:21322 WP No. 35443 of 2024 C/W WP No. 31213 of 2024 HC-KAR Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE PB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 27