- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16346 WP No. 6634 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 6634 OF 2024 (GM-BWSSB) BETWEEN: M/S D C H I RISE LLP, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNERS, SRI A LAKSHMAPPA AND SRI J SHANKAR, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO 1/3A, PANATHUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRIC- 560103, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH B R.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS ADDL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT , 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560001. 2. BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD BWSSB, BY ITS CHAIRMAN, REP BY THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CUM SECRETARY, I FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560009. 3. BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (EAST) VII FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1, SRI B L SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16346 WP No. 6634 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTE DATED 07/02/2024 (ANNEXURE-A) FOR ISSUANCE OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R3 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO REMITTANCE OF THE DEMAND OF RS. 84,66,258/- WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS NOC FEES, ADVANCE PROBABLE PRORATA CHARGES, GBWASP/BCC CHARGES AND TREATED WATER CHARGES FOR CONSTRUCTION IN PURSUANCE TO THE ONLINE APPLICATION BEARING NO. BWSSB-NOC-2023-12-3653-121405271687 DATED 14/12/2023 (ANNEXURE-C) WITH RESPECT TO PROPOSED PROJECT OF CONSTRUCTION OF MODIFIED RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT BUILDING AT SY. NO. 1/3A, 1/1, 102/2, 102/6 AND 102/8 OF PANATHUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, UNDER ANNEXURE-A TO THE WP. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Girish B R, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri.Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri B L Sanjeev, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 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 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16346 WP No. 6634 of 2024 Bangalore Water Sewerage Project charges, Advance Probable Pro Rata Charges and Treated Water Charges for Construction. These very 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. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16346 WP No. 6634 of 2024 (iv) Petitioners in these petitions who have deposited amounts demanded as Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges and Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage project charges is entitled to refund of the same, for which purpose the petitioners shall submit a representation. The same shall merit consideration within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. (v) In cases where in the event the petitioners has 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/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 468