M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECT LTD., v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
WP/5911/2025 · 2025-03-10
M Nagaprasanna
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17574 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17574 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10072 WP No. 5911 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 5911 OF 2025 (GM-BWSSB)
BETWEEN:
M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECT LTD., AN EXISTING COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 PRESTIGE FALCON TOWERS, NO.19, BRUNTON ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT BENGALURU-560025 REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - LEGAL MR. T. ARVIND PAI …PETITIONER (BY SMT. MARSHA JOSLYN GOVEAS, ADV. FOR SRI. GEORGE JOSEPH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2.
BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD, II FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
3. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF, BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD, II FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009
Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10072 WP No. 5911 of 2025
4.
THE CHIEF ENGINEER (EAST), BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD, II FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OF THE LIKE NATURE QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER RAISING A DEMAND NOTE FOR NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 2 RESPONDENT THROUGH THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 05.02.2025 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel Smt. Marsha Joslyn Goveas, for Sri. George Joseph., the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 Sri.Mohammad Jaffar Shah.
2. The charges levied against the petitioner, in the case at hand, are either few or all of these charges viz., Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges, Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage Project charges, Advance Probable Pro Rata Charges and Treated Water Charges for Construction. These very
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10072 WP No. 5911 of 2025
charges were considered by this Court in W.P.No.20016 of 2021 c/w W.P.No.10020 of 2020,
disposed on 05-04-2024, wherein this Court has upheld the Advance Probable Pro Rata Charges and Treated Water Charges for Construction and has quashed Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges and Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage Project charges, by the following order:
“35. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petitions are allowed in part.
(ii) The demand of Advance Probable Pro Rata Charges and Treated Water Charges for Construction are upheld.
(iii) The demand of Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges and Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage project charges are held to be illegal.
(iv) The obliteration as found in clause (iii) supra will not come in the way of the State or the Board to bring in the charges that are held to be illegal under the provisions of the Act or the Rules, by making suitable amendments to the Act, Rules or the Regulations. (iv) Petitioners in these petitions who have deposited
amounts demanded as Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges and Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage project charges are entitled to refund of the same, for which purpose the petitioners shall submit a representation. The same shall merit consideration within 12 weeks
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10072 WP No. 5911 of 2025
from the date of receipt of the copy of this
order.
(v) In cases where in the event the petitioners have deposited the amount before this Court, as a condition precedent for grant of the interim order, the Registry shall refund those amounts to the petitioners, in case of any deposit of the kind.”
3. In the light of the issues answered by this Court supra standing covered to the case at hand on all its fours, the writ petition stands disposed on the very same findings and observations. Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- ______________________ JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 111