- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.11956 OF 2021 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. MR. N. ADIRAMA ALIAS N. ADIRAM SON OF LATE NARAYANASWAMAPA ADOPTED SON OF ASWATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. 2. MRS. VIJAYALAKSHMI WIFE OF N. ADIRAMA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 3. MRS. GANGOTHRI D/O. N. ADIRAMA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 4. MS. RAMOTHRI D/O. N. ADIRAMA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. 5. MR. DASHRATHRAM SON OF N. ADIRAMA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ALL ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER MR. MAHESH G. SON MR. GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.B5, GOVIANU GRACE GARDEN BENSON ROAD, BENSON TOWN BENGALURU-560 046. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SYED KHAMRUDDIN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 3. DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR GOVERNMENTOF KARNATKA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 4. THE COMMISIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002. 5. THE JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (NORTH) BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BOPANNA B., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; SMT. SINCHANA M.R., ADVOCATE FOR R-4 AND R-5) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE GOVERNMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE R-2 DATED 18.1.2007 AND THE CORRIGENDUM THEREIN DATED 28.2.2007 MANDATING UPFRONT COLLECTION OF LABOUR WELFARE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 CESS AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-E CIRCULAR ISSUED BY R-3 COMMISSIONER DATED 4.9.2015 LEVYING FEES FOR ISSUE OF BUILDING LICENSE/SANCTION PLAN AS CONTAINED PAYMENT OF EXCESSIVE AND UNREASONABLE BETTERMENT/DEVELOPMENT FEE ON SITAL AREA AND SANCTIONED FOLLOW AREA AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-G AND THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R-5 JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING(NORTH) DATED 9.12.2020 AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-D. 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: i. Grant an Order, Direction or Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Government Order issued by the Respondent No. 2 bearing G. O. No. LD 300 LET 2006, dated 18th January 2007 and the Corrigendum therein dated 28th February 2007 mandating in upfront collection of Labour Welfare Cess as contained ANNEXURE 'E', Circular issued by the Respondent No. 3 Commissioner bearing No. ANUP/J.D(N)/DM3/PR/320/2015-16 dated 4th September 2015 levying fees for issue of Building License/ Sanction Plan, as contained in ANNEXURE 'F'; Circular dated 14th August 2020, demanding payment of excessive and unreasonable Betterment/ Develoment Fee on Sital Area and Sanctioned Floor Area, as contained in ANNEXURE 'G'; and the Demand Notice issued by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 Respondent No. 5, Joint Director Town Planning (North), bearing No. BBMP/Addl.Dir/JD NORTH/LP/0053/2019-20 dated 09th December 2020, as contained in ANNEXURE 'D'; ii. Grant an Order, Direction or Writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to issue the Sanction Plan for construction of Residential Building to the Petitioner; iii. Grant an Order, Direction or Declare that the Scrutiny Fee, License Fee, etc., levied on the basis of the market value of the property, as per guideline value fixed under Section 45 (B) of the Karnataka Stamp Act 1957 is bad in law; iv. Grant an Order, Direction or Declare that the upfront levy of Labour Welfare Cess is bad in law; V. Declare that the Commissioner of BBMP has no authority to impose/ levy fee on the basis of Market Value of Property fixed under Section 45 (B) of the Karnataka Stamp Act 1957, unless Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-Laws, 2003, is suitably amended and approved by the state Government; vi. Declare that the Respondents has no authority to collect the taxes under the guise of collection of License fee, Scrutiny Fee, Betterment Fee and Labour Welfare Cess under various heads, without sanction by the Government; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 vii. Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 4 to collect the fees as specified in the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-Laws, 2003 only; viii. Declare that the Respondents have no authority to collect Betterment/ Development Fee on the Sital Area in accordance with the amended Rule 37 – A(1)(a) in accordance with the Circular dated 14th August 2020 at ANNEXURE ‘G’and similarly, the Corporation has no authority to collect exorbitant Betterment/Development Fee on the Sanctioned Floor Area relying on the alleged Circular; ix. Declare that the Respondents has no authority to demand excessive Administrative Charges on the Labour Cess and Labour Cess per se: x. Declare that upfront Labour Welfare Cess on the Petitioner for obtaining Sanction Plan is, bad in law, since the Petitioner's construction will not be complete within one year and that therefore it has to be collected in installments; and xi. Grant such other Relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to Grant, including cost of the Petitioner, in 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 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 reported judgment in W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters. The Co-ordinate Bench, while deciding the issue, has held that the bye-laws under which Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License fee, Scrutiny fee are levied are ultra vires the Act. The Co-ordinate Bench also quashed the circular dated 04.09.2015 and Government circulars dated 27.01.2017 and 30.03.2017. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to cull out the operative portion of the order, which reads as under; "O R D E R" (a) All the Writ Petitions are allowed. (b) The bye-laws under which Ground Rent, Licence Fee, Building Licence Fee, Scrutiny Fee, Security Deposit are all held ultravires the Act and are resultantly rendered unenforceable. (c) The Circular bearing No.ºÉ¤£ÀAiÉÆÃ/eÉ.r(G)/rJªÀiï3/¦Dgï/320/2015-16 dated 04.09.2015 stands quashed. (d) The Circular bearing No.£ÀCE 36 ¨ÉªÀÄ¥Áæ 2016 (¨sÁUÀ) dated 27.01.2017 and the Circular bearing No. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 ºÉ¤£ÀAiÉÆÃ/¦Dgï/1533/2016-17 dated 30.03.2017 demanding Lake Rejuvenation Fee are quashed. (e) Imposition of labour cess under the Welfare Cess Act is upheld, but its demand for payment upfront in terms of Government Orders dated 18.01.2007 and 28.02.2007 stands quashed. (f) The State or the BBMP is not precluded from bringing in the impugned levies under the provisions of the Act or the Rules by making suitable amendments to the Act and the Rules. 368 (g) Petitioners in all these petitions who have deposited certain amounts in terms of the interim order passed by this Court before this Court are entitled to refund of the amounts so deposited. (h) Insofar as refund in other cases who have paid to the Corporation under protest, they shall be entitled to such refund only if the same is not collected from the consumers of the apartments, businesses as the case would be. (i) Insofar as all other payments made, they would all be at liberty to give representation to the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 BBMP and the BBMP would consider the refund of the amounts, in accordance with law and the findings of this Court. (j) If representations are made by the petitioners for refund, the BBMP shall pass appropriate orders within 12 weeks from the date of such representations. In view of disposal of the petitions, all pending Interlocutory Applications also stand disposed." 3. In the considered view of this Court, the issues raised in the present writ petition stand squarely covered by the authoritative pronouncement rendered by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters. The Co-ordinate Bench, after examining the statutory framework and the impugned levy mechanisms adopted by the BBMP, categorically held that the imposition of Ground Rent, Licence Fee, Building Licence Fee, Scrutiny Fee, and Security Deposit lacked statutory sanction and were ultra vires the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. The Co-ordinate Bench - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 further held that Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye- laws, 2003, which provided for imposition of Ground Rent, was also devoid of legal authority and consequently struck it down. The Court also quashed the impugned Circular dated 04.09.2015 issued by respondent No.4, as well as the Government Orders dated 27.01.2017 and 30.03.2017, which had directed collection of such fees without statutory backing. With specific reference to labour welfare cess, the Co-ordinate Bench upheld the competence of the State to levy the cess under the Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996, but set aside the directive mandating its upfront collection through Government Orders dated 18.01.2007 and 28.02.2007, thereby rendering the demand raised in anticipation of sanction of building plans unlawful. The Co-ordinate Bench also clarified that the only charging provision available under the Act was sub- section (20-b) of Section 423, which merely enabled collection of fees for services relating to burial grounds - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 and crematoria, and could not be relied upon for the imposition of unrelated charges such as ground rent or scrutiny fee. In light of these clear and binding findings, the controversy raised in the present writ petition does not survive for independent adjudication, as the grievance of the petitioner is directly addressed and resolved by the said judgment. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed by applying the ratio and operative portion of the judgment rendered in W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters. 4. 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 09.12.2020 issued by respondent No.5 as per Annexure-D is hereby set-aside. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26482 WP No. 11956 of 2021 (iii) Respondent- BBMP is 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 HDK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4