- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.33535 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. C. CHANDRAPRABHA AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS W/O. LATE C. CHENNAPPA RESIDING AT NO.133 "BENAKA", 1ST PHASE 2ND MAIN, NEHRU ROAD NEAR SBI BRANCH, GIRINAGAR, 1ST STAGE BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER DR. KAILASNATH C.C. 2. DR. KAILASNATH C.C. AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O. LATE C. CHENNAPPA RESIDING AT NO.133 "BENAKA", 1ST PHASE 2ND MAIN, NEHRU ROAD NEAR SBI BRANCH GIRINAGAR, 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU. 3. SANTHOSHNATH C.C. AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O. LATE C. CHENNAPPA RESIDING AT NO.133 "BENAKA", 1ST PHASE 2ND MAIN, NEHRU ROAD NEAR SBI BRANCH Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 GIRINAGAR, 1ST STAGE BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER DR. KAILASNATH C.C. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SAINATH D.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP) N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SOUTH) BBMP #8, 9TH CROSS ROAD 2ND BLOCK, JAYA NAGAR EAST JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560011 KARNATAKA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R-1; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AMENDMENT TO RULE 37A AND 37C TO THE KARNATAKA PLANNING AUTHORITIES (AMENDMENT) RULES 2019 NOTIFIED VIDE NOTIFICATION NO.UDD 3TPP 2015 DATED 25-2-2020 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT-1 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AT PAGE NO.21 TO 25 AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. (a) A writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the amendment to Rule 37A and 37 C to the Karnataka Planning Authorities (Amendment) Rules 2019 notified vide Notification No.UDD 3 TPP 2015 dated 25-02-2020 issued by 1st respondent as per Annexure-A at Page No.21 to 25. (b) A writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the circular No.HeNikaPaKo/PR/320/2020-21 dated 14-08- 2020 issued by 2nd respondent as per Annexure-B at Page No.26 to 27. (c) A writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Demand Notice bearing No.BBMP/Ad.Com/SUT/1624/23-24 dated 31.10.2023, calling upon the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.49,40,000/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lakh and Forty Thousand only) and additional payment towards Labour Cess of sum of Rs.3,02,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh and Two Thousand only), issued by the Respondent No.3 as specified in Annexure G at page No.58 to 59. (d) A writ or order declaring the entire Karnataka Municipal Corporations and certain other law - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 (Amendment), Karnataka Act 2021 as ultra virus to the constitution issued by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-H at Page No.60 to 65. (e) A writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Circular bearing No.HeNiNaYa/PR/461/2021-22 dated 09-03- 2022 issued by 2nd respondent as per Annexure-J at Page No.66 to 70. (f) A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the various fees levied on the basis of guidance value of the property are bad and unconstitutional. (g) Pass such other/further orders as this authority may deem fit in light of the facts and 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). - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 Therefore, this Court deems it fit to cull out the operative portion of the order, which reads as under; ORDER (i) The writ petitions are partly allowed. (ii) The Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (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 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 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 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 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 acceptable to the citizens of Bengaluru. This would also augment the present situation." 3. In the present writ petition, 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 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 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 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 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 petition no longer survives for adjudication independently, as it is squarely covered by the binding judgment of the coordinate bench. In the light of the law laid down in the reported judgment, substantially covering the issue, which is raised in the captioned writ petition, the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 writ petition is 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 petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 31.10.2023 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-G 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 petitioner's 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 file an appeal against the reported judgment. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20984 WP No. 33535 of 2024 (vi) If the building license 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. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE DH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20