Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28094 (KAR)

SRI JAMPALA RAVINDRA BABU v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17236/2024 · 2025-04-21

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16391 WP No. 17236 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. 17236 OF 2024 (GM-BWSSB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI JAMPALA RAVINDRA BABU, S/O NARASHIMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO. 54, SY.NO. 34/10,34/9, 34/2, GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE, BANGALORE FAST TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 077. (SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED) 2. SMT. S JANAKI KUMAR, W/O S R KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO. 54, SY.NO. 34/10, 34/9, 34/2, GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE, K R PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE FAST TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 077. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA S V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. BANGLAORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD 2ND FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16391 WP No. 17236 of 2024 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (EAST) BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD 6TH FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1, SRI K B MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 01.02.2024 BEARING NO. BWSSB-NOC-2024-1-23-010201074177 ISSUED BY THE R-3 (ANNX-B) FOR DEMANDING THE GREATER BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE PROJECT / BENEFICIARY CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION (GBWASP/BCC) CHARGES IS CONCERNED AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE OF 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC. 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 Manjunatha S.V., learned counsel for petitioners, Sri. Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri K.B. Monesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. The charges levied against the petitioners, in the case at hand, are either few or all of these charges viz., Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges, Greater Bangalore Water - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16391 WP No. 17236 of 2024 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. (iv) Petitioners in these petitions who have deposited amounts demanded as Beneficiary Capital Contribution Charges and Greater Bangalore Water Sewerage - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16391 WP No. 17236 of 2024 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. I.A.No.1 of 2024 is disposed, as a consequence. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 488