- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 31852 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1 . SRI P H PUJAR MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, S/O.HANUMANTHAPPA PUJAR, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, ROOM NO.220/221, LEGISLATORS HOME, BENGALURU-560001. (BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJAPPA.A,ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001. 3 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 BENGALURU-560001. 4 . THE UNDER SECRETARY (TECHNICAL-5), IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, VIKAS SOUDHA DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001. 5 . THE CHIEF ENGINEER, BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT, BAGALKOT DISTRICT-587101. …RESPONDENTS (BYSMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA., AAG ALONG WITH SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4; NOTICE TO R-5 DEFERRED VIDE ORDER DATED:02.12.2024) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10.09.2024 ADDRESSED BY THE R-4 TO THE R-3 IN No.E.SANKE.JA.SU.E.230.KBN.2023 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-G, ETC. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 16.01.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA CAV ORDER 1. The petitioner is a Member of the Legislative Council (MLC) elected from the Local Body Constituency in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 the year 2020. He has filed this petition challenging the communication dated 10.09.2024 which has been addressed by respondent No.4 to respondent No.3 by which the earlier opinion of the Department of Parliamentary Affairs was withdrawn and the opinion dated 10.09.2024 was ordered to be implemented. 2. This communication essentially states that the petitioner by virtue of being an MLC cannot participate in the proceedings of the Bagalkot Town Development Authority (BTDA) and can only participate in the proceedings of the Bagalkot Urban Development Authority (BUDA). In short, the petitioner contends that by virtue of being an MLC representing the Local Body Constituency, he is not entitled to be a part of the BTDA, but can only be a member of the BUDA, which had been constituted under Act No.13 of 1985. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 3. In order to appreciate the contentions urged by the petitioner, an analysis of the provisions of the four statutes would be necessary. 4. For the sake of convenience, these statutes are segregated in relation to time during which they are enacted. 1976: 5. The Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976 (“KIB Act”) was enacted on 08.03.1976 with the object of providing for establishment of Improvement Boards for the development of urban areas in the State of Karnataka. This Act provided for constitution of Improvement Boards, by issuance of a notification of the Government and the Boards so constituted was required to draw up a detailed scheme for the development or improvement of urban areas. 1985: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 6. The Karnataka Improvement Boards Act was amended by Amending Act No.13 of 1985, whereby Chapter – IIA was inserted. This amendment was specific to the town of Bagalkot, which is clear from the Statement of Objects and Reasons to the amending act, which reads as follows: “Amending Act 13 of 1985:- Bagalkot town will get submerged with the construction of the Almatti Dam up to a crest level of 1680 feet in the 1st stage of the Upper Krishana Project. The Almatti Dam is expected to reach the crest level of 1680 feet by June, 1987. Hence Government has decided to shift the affected portion of Bagalkot town to a higher location and to construct a new township. It is proposed to constitute a statutory body with statutory powers called the Bagalkot town Development Authority. The Authority shall take expeditious steps to shift that portion of Bagalkot town which is going to be submerged and for this purpose an Action Plan Committee shall be constituted. There shall also be a high level review committee with the Chief Minister as Chairman. The Authority shall execute the work approved by the Action Plan Committee and shall comply with the directions - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 issued from time to time by the Action Plan Committee and the High Level Review Committee. The chief engineer of the Bagalkot Town Development Authority shall be the Chief Executive and Administrative Officer of the Authority. Hence this bill. (Published in the Karnataka Gazette (Extraordinary) Part IV-2A dated 20-3-1985 as No.151 at page 10.)” 7. As could be seen from the above, the Legislature was of the view that the constitution of an Improvement Board for the town of Bagalkot would be inadequate and therefore, a separate statutory body which was to be conferred with statutory powers was required to be constituted. This was obviously because the Bagalkot was to be submerged with the construction of Almatti Dam and the portion of the town, which was affected, was required to be shifted to a higher location and a new township was also to be constructed, which by it’s very nature was a special - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 requirement as compared to the normal development of towns in the State, which was to be achieved through the Improvement boards. 8. Chapter-IIA of the KIB Act was exclusively devoted to Bagalkot Town Development Authority. 9. Section 12A of KIB Act provided for constitution and incorporation of BTDA and apart from several members who constituted the Board, one of the members of BTDA was to be the Members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly (“MLA”) who represented a part or whole of Bagalkot town area.1 10. The BTDA was basically required to execute the works which were approved by the Action Plan Committee, which was essentially a body of bureaucrats. The works that were to be carried out by the BTDA was to be reviewed by a High Level Review Committee comprising of the Chief Minister, 1 12A(3)(iii) the Members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly representing a part or whole of Bagalkot Town Area. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Four other Ministers, the Additional Chief Secretary, the Development Commissioner and two Secretaries. 11. Section 12B of the KIB Act stipulated that apart from other powers and duties conferred under the Act, the BTDA was required to take expeditious steps to shift the portion of Bagalkot area, which was to be submerged, for which, an Action Plan Committee comprising of bureaucrats mentioned above, was to be constituted. 12. The BTDA was bound by the directions, orders and instructions issued from time to time by the Action Plan Committee or the High Level Review Committee which had been constituted under Section 12C of the KIB Act. Thus, there was a three tier mechanism created by insertion of Chapter-IIA to KIB Act for the town of Bagalkot. 13. There would be the Town Development Authority, the body which would act as per the directions issued by - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 either the other two bodies i.e., the Action Plan Committee or the High Level Review Committee. To put it differently, the Legislature was of the view that in order to ensure the development of Bagalkot town, keeping in mind that a portion of it being submerged, a separate statutory authority comprising of three entities were required to be constituted. 14. The BTDA was in fact granted power to make bulk allotment under Section 37A of the KIB Act. 15. As already stated above, under the KIB Act, it was only the local MLAs who represented the Bagalkot town who were entitled to be the members of BTDA and the Legislature did not provide for MLCs to be a part of this authority. 1987: 16. In the year 1987, the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 (“KUDA Act”) was enacted with the object of establishing the Urban - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Development Authorities (“UDA”) for the planning, development and improvement of major urban areas in the State. The provisions of KUDA Act would come into force on such dates as the Government may by notification specify. The statute provided for different dates and issuance of different notifications to be given for different urban areas. 17. Section 3 of KUDA Act, which provided for constitution and incorporation of UDA, stipulated that the Government may by notification constitute in any urban area, an authority for the development of such area to be called “…………. Development Authority”. 18. The UDA was to be a multi member body, amongst which, not only the MLAs who represented the part or whole of the urban area, but also the MLCs who - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 were permanent residents of the urban area concerned, were to be the members of the UDA.2 19. Thus, as against only an MLA being the member of BTDA constituted under the KIB Act, the UDA provided for not only the local MLAs, but also the MLCs, who were permanent residents of concerned urban area, to be the part of the Authority. 20. It may be pertinent to state here that when the KUDA Act was enacted in the year 1987, in respect of the town of Bagalkot, there was already the BTDA in existence with effect from 10.10.1984. 21. The important provision which is necessary for the purpose of this case is Section 78 of the KUDA Act, which reads as follows: “78. Consequence of constitution of Urban Development Authority.- (1) On the issue of a notification under sub-section (1) of section 3 constituting an Urban Development Authority for any Urban Area the Karnataka Improvements Boards Act, 2 3(3)(d) Members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly representing a part or whole of the urban area and members of the Karnataka Legislative Council who are the permanent residents of the urban area concerned. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 1976 (Karnataka Act 11 of 1976) or the City of Mysore Improvement Act, 1903 (Mysore Act III of 1903), as the case may be, shall cease to be applicable in such Urban Area. (2) On such cessor, the Improvement Board 1[the Bagalkot Town Development Authority]1 or the City Improvement Trust Board, Mysore constituted under the said Acts for such Urban Areas shall stand dissolved. 1. These words are to be omitted when Act 12 of 1996 is brought into force. (3) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), nothing in sub-section (1) shall affect,- (a) the previous operation of the said enactments or anything done, or suffered thereunder; or (b) any right, privilege, application or liability, acquired, accrued or incurred in the said enactment; or (c) any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against the said enactments; or (d) any investigation, local proceeding or remedy in respect of such right, privilege, obligation, liability, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid; and any such investigations, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued, or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if this Act had not been enacted. (4) (a) Subject to the preceding provision, anything done or any action taken (including any appointment, or delegation made, tax or fee imposed, notification, order, instrument, or direction issued, rule, regulation, bye-law or scheme framed, certificate obtained, permit or licence granted or registration effected, in the said Acts shall be deemed to have been done or taken in the corresponding provisions of this Act and shall continue if enforced accordingly unless and until superseded by anything done or any action taken under this Act; (b) Every officer and servant of an Improvement Board, 1[the Bagalkot Town Development Authority]1and the City Improvement Trust Board, Mysore as the case may be, other - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 than such class of servants as the Government may by order specify, shall become employees of the corresponding Urban Development Authority and shall, until other provisions are made, receive the salary and allowances and be subject to the conditions of service to which they were entitled immediately before the constitution of the Authority for the Urban Areas concerned; 1. These words are to be omitted when Act 12 of 1996 is brought into force. (c) All assets and liabilities of and all contracts made by or on behalf of,- (i) the Improvement Board; (ii) 1[the Bagalkot Town Development Authority]1 (iii) the City Improvement Trust Board, immediately before the date of constitution of an Authority for the Urban Area under this Act and subsisting on that date shall stand transferred to the concerned Urban Development Authority; 1. These words are to be omitted when Act 12 of 1996 is brought into force. (d) Where a provident fund or superannuation fund or any other like fund has been established for the benefit of the employees of the Improvement Board *[the Bagalkot Town Development Authority] or the City Improvement Trust Board, Mysore, the moneys standing to the credit of any such fund on the date of commencement of this Act together with any other assets belonging to such fund shall stand transferred to and vest in the Government and the Government shall be liable to discharge the obligations of the Improvement Board' 1[the Bagalkot Town Development Authority]1 or the City Improvement Trust Board, Mysore, in respect of such fund; 1.These words are to be omitted when Act 12 of 1996 is brought into force. (e) Any reference in any enactment made or any instrument to any provisions of any of the repealed enactment shall, unless a different intention appears, be construed as a reference to the corresponding provisions of this Act.” - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 22. As could be seen from the above provision, the moment a notification under Section 3(1) of KUDA Act was issued constituting an UDA for any urban area, the provisions KIB Act or the City of Mysore Improvements Act, 1903 (“CMIA”) would cease to be applicable to such urban area. The effect of this would be none of the provisions of the Act could be used to exercise control over development of an urban area, for which an UDA had been constituted. 23. Sub-section (2) of Section 78 of the KUDA Act stipulated that on such cessation, the Improvement Boards i.e., BTDA or City Improvement Trust Board (“CITB”) constituted under said Acts would stand dissolved. This sub-section was essentially reflecting the automatic consequence of the KIB Act being made inapplicable to an urban area for which a UDA had been constituted. - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 24. Section 78(4)(b) of KUDA Act also stipulated that every officer and servant of Improvement Boards i.e., BTDA and the CITB, Mysore, would become the employees of the corresponding UDA and would be entitled to receive salary and allowance and would be subject to the conditions of service to which they were entitled immediately before the constitution of the UDA. 25. The provision also indicated that all the assets and liabilities and also the contracts made by or on behalf of the Improvement Boards, BTDA and CITB would stand transferred to the concerned UDA. Similarly, any provident fund or superannuation fund or any other similar fund which had been established for the benefit of the employees of the Improvement Boards, BTDA or CITB would also stand transferred and vest in the Government and the Government would be liable to discharge the obligation of those erstwhile entities. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 26. It is therefore clear that KUDA Act has originally enacted, contemplated the automatic dissolution of Improvement Boards, BTDA and CITB on the constitution of UDA and all its employees and assets would also be transferred to the concerned UDA. In short, on a UDA being constituted, fundamentally, the UDA took over the functioning of erstwhile Authorities and its obligations, funds and also its employees. 27. It may be pertinent to state here that as no UDA was constituted in Bagalkot town pursuant to enactment of the KUDA Act, and as a result, the BTDA which had been constituted under the KIB Act continued to subsist. 1996: 28. While BTDA was in subsistence, having been constituted under the provisions of KIB Act, the Legislature enacted the Karnataka Krishna Basin - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Development Authority Act, 1992 (“KKBDA Act”) which came into effect on 07.09.1994. This KKBDA Act was enacted with an intent to provide for constitution of an Authority for expeditious utilization of the Karnataka’s share of waters of Krishna River and its tributaries and also to execute the other projects and works relating to Krishna Basin Area. It was also enacted to promote agricultural and joint development of Krishna Basin Area. 29. The town of Bagalkot was situate within the Krishna Basin Area, and therefore came within the ambit of the KKBDA Act. 30. It may be pertinent to state here that Section 5 of KKBDA Act, which provides for constitution of KKBDA, did not provide for either the MLAs or the MLCs, who represented the constituency coming within the Krishna Basin Area to be members of said Authority. The Authority was comprised of the Chief Minister, Five Ministers, Finance Commissioner, - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Three Secretaries, the Chairman of Karnataka Electricity Board, Managing Director of Karnataka Power Corporation and its Chief Executive. This Authority was entrusted with the function of undertaking planning, investigation, estimation, execution, operation and maintenance of all irrigation projects to promote and operate schemes and more importantly, for the purpose of this case, to formulate and execute the schemes for comprehensive development of the entire Krishna Basin Area. 31. Thus, there was an enactment created exclusively to uplift and develop the Krishna Basin Area with twin objective of utilizing the share of water of Krishna River by the State of Karnataka and also to promote agricultural and general development of Krishna Basin Area. 32. The KKBDA Act amended Section 78 of KUDA Act by virtue of Section 46 (1) of KKBDA Act, to the effect - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 that the words “the Bagalakote Town Development Authority” in Section 78 of KUDA Act, wherever they occurred stood omitted. 33. The effect of this amendment to the KUDA Act was that, if the State decided to constitute a UDA in Bagalkot Town under the provisions of KUDA Act, by virtue of the amended Section 78 of KUDA Act, the BTDA would neither cease to be applicable, nor would it stand dissolved. This is basically because there was a specific Authority constituted for the entire Krishna Basin Area including the town of Bagalkot and the Legislature was of the view that on a UDA being constituted, the BTDA would continue to exist. 34. Sub-section (2) of Section 46 of KKBDA Act, which would be relevant for this case, reads as under: “46. Amendment of Karnataka Act 34 of 1987:(1) **** (2)The moneys standing to the credit of fund in the Bagalkot Town Development Authority on the date of - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 commencement of this Act together with any other assets belonging to such fund shall stand transferred to and vest in the Authority and the Authority shall be liable to discharge the obligations of Bagalkot Town Development Authority in respect of such funds.” 35. As could be seen from the above, apart from permitting the BTDA to continue even if an Urban Development Authority was constituted, the amendment also stipulated that all the moneys standing to the credit of fund in BTDA together with any other assets would stand transferred and vest in the Authority i.e., the KKBDA. More importantly, the KKBDA was made liable to discharge the obligation of BTDA in respect of such funds. 36. Though by virtue of sub-section (1) of Section 46 of KKBDA Act, the Legislature contemplated continuance of BTDA in the event of an Urban Development Authority was constituted, nevertheless, it transferred all the funds of BTDA to KKBDA and furthermore, the KKBDA was made liable for discharging all the obligations of BTDA. In other - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 words, by virtue of Section 46(2) of KKBDA Act, the BTDA became a non-functional body with neither the funds, nor any obligations to discharge. 37. It is to be stated here that if a statutory body, such as BTDA, which was entrusted with specific functions under Chapter-IIA of KIB Act, is made redundant by virtue of transferring all its funds to KKBDA and it also made KKBDA responsible for discharging all its obligations, it is obvious that BTDA would only be an entity on paper with neither powers to do anything, nor with the statutory duties to discharge any obligations. 38. It is to be kept in mind that in order to exercise powers or to discharge its obligations by any entity, especially a local authority, funds are an absolute must and when the funds of BTDA in its entirety was itself transferred to KKBDA and the KKBDA was made responsible for discharging the obligation of BTDA, both in reality and in law, it cannot be contended - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 that the BTDA would still continue to exist and would still have the responsibility of discharging its obligation as provided under Chapter-IIA of KIB Act. 39. It may be pertinent to state here that when KKBDA Act was enacted in the year 1994, no UDA was constituted for Bagalkot town as provided under Section 3(1) of KUDA Act and therefore, the KKBDA became the authority to discharge the functions of BTDA. As a consequence, the problem which has now arisen did not arise for being resolved. 2020: 40. As the matter stood thus, when the KKBDA was entrusted with the discharging of obligations of BTDA, the State issued a notification under Section 3(1) of KUDA Act and constituted the BUDA. On constitution of the BUDA, by virtue of Section 3(3)(d) of KUDA Act, both the MLAs representing the part or whole of urban area and also the MLCs who were - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 permanent residents of the urban area, automatically became the members of BUDA. It is not in dispute that as a consequence of BUDA being constituted, the petitioner has become a member of BUDA just like the local MLAs. 41. However, since for the town of Bagalkot, by virtue of deletion of the words “BTDA” in Section 78 of KUDA Act, though the BUDA was constituted, the BTDA did not stand dissolved. 42. It must however be stated that, as already noticed above, even though the BTDA would not stand dissolved but would subsist, it would only be a paper entity, as provided under Chapter-IIA of KIB Act, inasmuch as all its funds and functions were entrusted to KKBDA under the KKBDA Act. 43. It is, however, the contention of the petitioner that since the BTDA subsisted, he should be a member of said Authority. - 24 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 44. It may be pertinent to state here that since KKBDA was in-charge of town of Bagalkot, by virtue of Section 46(2) of KKBDA Act, neither the MLAs, nor the MLCs could be the part of KKBDA and thus, they would have no right to participate in the governance of Bagalkot town which was entrusted exclusively to KKBDA. 45. It appears that local MLAs alone continued to be the members of the BTDA and the attempt of the petitioner to also become the part of said non- functional BTDA was not permitted, which resulted in the impugned orders and this writ petition. 2021: 46. As the matter stood thus, i.e., Bagalkot town was being administered by KKBDA and the BTDA was only being a paper entity with neither funds, nor any obligations to discharge, the Legislature proceeded to repeal the KKBDA Act itself under the Karnataka - 25 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Krishna Basin Development Authority (Repeal) Act, 2021 (“Repeal Act”) with effect from 05.04.2021. 47. Section 2 of said Repeal Act reads as follows: “2. Repeal and savings. (1) The Karnataka Krishna basin Development Authority Act, 1992(Karnataka Act 12 of 1996) is hereby repealed: Provided that, such repeal shall not affect, (a) the previous operation of the Act so repealed, or anything duly done or suffered thereunder; (b) any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the Act, so repealed; (c) any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed under the Act so repealed; or d) any investigation, legal proceeding, or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid; and any such investigation, legal proceedings or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced and any such penalty, forfeiture and punishment may be imposed, as if this Act had not been passed.” 48. As could be seen from the above, the repealing provision clearly stated that the repeal would not affect the previous operation of the Act or anything done thereunder, nor would affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or - 26 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 incurred under the Act or affect any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed under the Act. 49. It must be stated here that even under the general law relating to repeal and savings, anything that had been done under the KKBDA Act was saved and would not be affected by the repeal of said Act, but at the same time, it would not also revive anything which had been done away by virtue of the Act. 50. As already stated above, by virtue of Section 46 of KKBDA Act, Section 78 of KUDA Act was amended and more importantly, by virtue of Section 46(2), the entire funds of BTDA stood transferred and furthermore, the KKBDA was made liable to discharge the obligations of BTDA. 51. However, by virtue of the repeal of KKBDA Act, it is obvious that KKBDA itself ceased to exist. The consequence of such cessation of the authority would - 27 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 not result in the automatic revival of BTDA and this is because of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, which reads as follows: “6. Effect of repeal.— Where this Act, or any Act made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not— (a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect ; or (b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder ; or (c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed ; or (d) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed ; or (e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid ; and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act had not been passed.” 52. As could be seen from the above, whenever an Act is repealed, the repeal would not revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect. - 28 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 53. Thus, the BTDA which was fundamentally, a non- functional entity with neither funds, nor any obligations to discharge, would not stand revived in the light of the clear declaration found in Section 6 (a) of the General Clauses Act and in the absence of a different intention clearly expressed in the Repeal Act. 54. In other words, if it was an intention of the Legislature while repealing the KKBDA Act, the BTDA would stand revive, an express provision was required to be made that the funds of BTDA or atleast some proportion of the funds the KKBDA had in relation to Bagalkot town would stand re- transferred to the funds of BTDA and that the BTDA would once again have the responsibility of discharging its obligation as provided under Chapter- IIA of KIB Act. 55. To put it differently, since no specific provision was made when the KKBDA Act was repealed, about the - 29 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 fate of BTDA, which neither had any obligations to discharge nor any funds to discharge them with, a vacuum was created as a result of which a dispute has arisen as to whether BTDA and BUDA both exist on the repeal of the KKBDA. 56. It is argued that since the KKBDA Act amended the KUDA Act and omitted “BTDA”, wherever it occurred in Section 78 of KUDA Act, the constitution of BUDA would not result in dissolution of BTDA and the BTDA would continue to exist and would be entitled to discharge its obligations under Chapter-IIA of KIB Act. It is therefore argued that as a consequence of this, the petitioner who is an MLC would not be entitled to be a member of BTDA. 57. In other words, a piquant situation arisen in respect of Bagalkot town by virtue of omission of “BTDA” in Section 78 of KUDA Act. - 30 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 58. The BTDA which was constituted in the year 1985 under the KIB Act, became an ineffective body i.e., a paper entity with neither funds nor obligations to discharge by virtue of Section 46 (2) of the KKBDA Act and from the year 1996, the KKBDA became the entity to administer the development of Bagalkot town. Basically, notwithstanding the constitution of KKBDA, the BTDA existed but only on paper. 59. In 2020, when the BUDA was also constituted and it has been conferred with the powers of development of urban area of Bagalkot, the provisions of the KIB Act became inapplicable for the town of Bagalokot and thus the BTDA could not function as its entire existence was dependent on the applicability of the KIB Act. 60. This situation, in essence, created two bodies i.e., BTDA and BUDA, which would exist and work in parallel. In other words, there is a duplication of functions in respect of urban area of Bagalkot. One - 31 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 would be the BUDA, which would be responsible for the planned development of Bagalokot town with the requisite funds and the other body would be the BTDA, which had no funds or obligations to discharge, both having been transferred to KKBDA and this KKBDA ceased to exist on the KKBDA Act being repealed. This is obviously a situation which was probably, neither contemplated, nor is it desirable. 61. The intent of the Legislature, as could be gathered from Section 78 of KUDA Act is that whenever an UDA is constituted, automatically, the KIB Act ceases to be applicable. On a plain reading of Section 78(1) of KUDA Act, it is clear that KIB Act or the CITB Act would cease to be applicable whenever a UDA is constituted. If the provisions of KIB Act itself are made inapplicable, the question of any Improvement Board constituted under the said Act being in - 32 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 subsistence and being able to function would not arise. 62. Since the BTDA was constituted under the provisions of KIB Act, it is obvious that even if it was a paper entity, it cannot function simply because the provisions of the KIB Act itself have been made expressly inapplicable in respect of an urban area constituted under the KUDA Act, by virtue of Section 78 (1) of KUDA Act. The mere omission of words “BTDA” in Section 78 of KUDA Act would not lead to an inference that BTDA would survive and its powers to administer the town of Bagalkot stood revived. 63. As already stated above, the BTDA can survive only if the provisions of KIB Act continued to be applicable for the town of Bagalkot. If the KIB Act under which BTDA was created, was itself made inapplicable to an urban area, on the constitution of UDA, the question of BTDA continuing to survive would not arise. - 33 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 64. It may also be pertinent to state here that on the KKBDA being constituted in the year 1996, all the funds of BTDA stood statutorily transferred to KKBDA. Furthermore, even the functions which were to be discharged by BTDA were also transferred to KKBDA. In the context of this particular fact, it is rather clear that it was the intent of the legislature that the entire Krishna Basin Area would be administered by the KKBDA and in the year 1996, it could not even be in the contemplation of the Legislature that in the future, the KKBDA Act itself would be repealed. 65. In other words, the thinking of the Legislature as of 1996, was that the KKBDA would be the governing body for development of the entire Krishna Basin Area and the constitution of a UDA was not really foreseen at that point in time. It is ostensibly for this reason, in Section 78 of KUDA Act, it was decided to omit “BTDA” from the statute. - 34 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 66. The consequential inference is that even if subsequently a UDA was constituted, the intent of the Legislature was that the KKBDA would continue to govern the entire Krishna Basin Area in relation to planned development and not a UDA. To put it differently, as of 1996, it was the thinking of the Legislature that the KKBDA would be the entity for the planned development of the entire Krishna Basin Area including Bagalkot. 67. However, since the Legislature passed the Repealing Act, the KKBDA itself stood dissolved and therefore, it is obvious that BUDA would be the only authority to administer the planning and development work in the town of Bagalkot. 68. In the absence of any funds at the disposal of BTDA, or obligations to discharge by virtue of Section 46 (2) of the KKBDA Act, obviously, the existence and purpose of BTDA would be meaningless. The - 35 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 Legislature has obviously not kept this situation in mind when it repealed the KKBDA Act. 69. Unless the Legislature were to create a specific provision under the Repealing Act which expressly revived the BTDA, on the constitution of BUDA, the BTDA would merely continue to exist on paper with neither funds nor any obligations to discharge. In reality, by virtue of this situation, there are two Authorities vying to administer the urban area of Bagalkot, one under the provisions of KIB Act and one under the provisions of KUDA Act. 70. As already noticed above, since under Section 78 (1) of KUDA Act, the provisions of KIB Act have expressly been made inapplicable and as a necessary consequence, it is obvious that BTDA cannot function and discharge any duties under the KIB Act. 71. In the result, it has to be clarified that the provisions of KIB Act would become inapplicable on the - 36 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 constitution of BUDA by virtue of Section 78(1) of KUDA Act and as a further consequence, the BTDA cannot exercise or discharge any of its functions since the provisions under which it was constituted are itself made inapplicable. 72. Consequentially, it is only BUDA which would be the lawful entity to discharge the functions entrusted to it under the provisions of KUDA Act. 73. As a result of this legal position, the petitioner being an MLC would also be a member of the BUDA, just as an MLA who represents either part or whole of constituency for the urban area of Bagalkot and it is the BUDA alone which will govern the development of the urban area of Bagalkot as provided under the KUDA Act and the BTDA would essentially be a non- functional body which would exist only on paper because the provisions of the KIB Act under which it was constituted have become inapplicable to the urban area of Bagalkot. - 37 - NC: 2025:KHC:8859 WP No. 31852 of 2024 74. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 101