- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 971 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. M.BABU S/O SRI. MANJA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS 2. SMT. SUSHEELA W/O SRI. M.BABU AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 3. MS. B MAMATHA D/O M. BABU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.1747, 9TH CROSS, JP NAGAR II PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078 &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKARVEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE - 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING SOUTH ZONE-8, N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE - 560 002 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BOPANNA B., AGA FOR R1; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.BBMP/EODB/CH/38382/2024-25 DATED 07/12/2024 AT ANNEXURE B ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN SO FAR AS THE DEMAND OF RS.37,816/- TOWARDS SCRUTINY FEE, LICENSE FEE OF RS 7,54,169/-, GROUND RENT AND GST OF RS 6,99,222, LAKE REJUVENATION FEE OF RS 13,025, FEE U/S 18(1) OF KTCP (BETTERMENT LEVY) FOR BUILDING RS 1,69,600, FEE U/S 18(1) OF KTCP (BETTERMENT LEVY) FOR SITE OF RS.4,13,707 WATER SUPPLY CESS OF RS 41,370.70, RING ROAD SURCHARGE OF 41,370.70 AND CESS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF SLUMS 20,685, MRTS SURCHARGE OF RS 2,06,853 AND SECURITY DEPOSIT OF RS 1,69,600. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Petitioners, in the captioned petition has sought for following reliefs : "a) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the demand notice No.BBMP/EODB/CH/38382/2024-25 dated 07/12/2024 at Annexure - B issued by the respondent No.3 in so far as the demand of Rs.37,816/- towards Scrutiny Fee, License Fee of Rs 7,54,169/-, Ground Rent & GST of Rs 6,99,222, Lake Rejuvenation Fee of Rs 13,025, Fee U/s 18(1) of KTCP (Betterment Levy) for Building Rs 1,69,600, Fee U/s 18(1) of KTCP (Betterment Levy) for site of Rs.4,13,707 Water Supply Cess of Rs 41,370.70, Ring Road surcharge of 41,370.70 and Cess for Improvement of Slums 20,685, MRTS Surcharge of Rs 2,06,853 & Security Deposit of Rs 1,69,600. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring that Bye-law No.3.9 in the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws, 2003 framed under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act as unconstitutional, arbitrary, illegal and ultravires; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 c) Issue writ of mandamus or similar writ or order or direction directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to issue building plan and license pursuant to the demand notice No. BBMP/EODB/CH/38382/2024-25 dated 07/12/2024 at Annexure - B issued by the respondent No.3 without insisting for payment of amount mentioned above. d) Issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction deemed fit in the 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). Therefore, this Court deems it fit to cull out the operative portion of the order, which reads as under; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 "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 8Development Plan9 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 for subsequent 8Development Plan9 in terms of the 8Note9 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 8market value9 or 8guidance value9 as determined under Section 45-B of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 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 8Ground Rent9, 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 8One Time Settlement9 and settle the levy and collect the fee generally 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 Hon9ble Court, in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 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 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 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 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 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. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22991 WP No. 971 of 2025 (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 07.12.2024 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-B is hereby set-aside. (iii) Respondent- BBMP hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. (iv) Respondent- BBMP is 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. (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 SMJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9