Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Spectrapacks Pvt Ltd vs State Of Karnataka on 16 June, 2025

                                                  -1-
                                                             NC: 2025:KHC:20503
                                                            WP No. 1163 of 2025


                       HC-KAR




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                 DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

                                               BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

                                WRIT PETITION NO.1163 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

                      BETWEEN:

                      M/S.SPECTRAPACKS PVT LTD
                      A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
                      COMPANIES ACT 1956
                      REG. OFFICE AT 1/122A
                      SILVER CLOUD ESTATES
                      GUDALUR - 643211

                      REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA
                      M/S MOUDGALYA CONSTRUCTIONS
                      A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED
                      UNDER THE PARTNERSHIP ACT
                      HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
Digitally signed by   NO.41/4, 3RD CROSS
NAGARAJA B M
                      S.G.PALYA, BENGALURU- 560039
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                      REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER
                      SRI. S N SRINIVASAN
                      AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

                                                                   ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. VIVEKANANDA T P, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2025:KHC:20503
                                     WP No. 1163 of 2025


 HC-KAR



     URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
     4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA
     DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
     BENGALURU - 560 001

2.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
     DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS
     AND LEGISLATION
     DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
     BENGALURU - 560 001

3.   THE BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
     N.R.SQUARE
     BENGALURU - 560 002
     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER

4.   THE JOINT DIRECTOR
     TOWN PLANNING (SOUTH)
     BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
     N.R.SQUARE
     BENGALURU - 560 002

                                         ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R-1 AND R-2
    SRI.K.B.MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND R-4)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING    TO    QUASH     THE    KARNATAKA     MUNICIPAL
CORPORATIONS AND CERTAIN OTHER LAW (AMENDMENT) ACT,
2021 ACT NO.1/2022 DTD. 13.01.2022 ENACTED BY THE R-2
PUBLISHED THROUGH NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.DPAL 50
SHASANA 2021 GAZETTED ON 13.01.2022 AT ANNX-H DECLARING
IT TO BE ULTRAVIRES AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN SO FAR AS
PETITIONER CONCERNED AND ETC.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                      -3-
                                                      NC: 2025:KHC:20503
                                                  WP No. 1163 of 2025


HC-KAR




CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM


                              ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs.

"i) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 Act No.1/2022 dated 13.01.2022 enacted by the second respondent published through notification bearing No.DPAL 50 SHASANA 2021 gazetted on 13.01.2022 at Annexure-H declaring it to be ultravires and unconstitutional in so far as petitioner concerned.
ii) Issue writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the Office Order bearing No.ADTP/PR/ 461/ 2021-22 dated 09.03.2022 issued by the third respondent at Annexure-J.
iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the fee demand notice bearing No.BBMP/Addl.Dir/JD South/LP/0256/2017-18 dated 04.01.2025 at Annexure -E issued by the Respondent No.4 in so far as demand towards Ground Rent of Rs.92,65,017/-, GST at 18% in a sum of Rs. 16,67,703/-, License fee of Rs.47,16,736/-, Scrutiny fee of Rs.2,35,837/-, are concerned.
-4-

NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR

iv) issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents 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;

"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.
-5-

NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR

(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 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 -6- NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR 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 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). -7-

NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR

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 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.

-8-

NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR

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.

(ii) The impugned demand notice dated 04.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-E is hereby set-aside.

(iii) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are hereby directed to issue Occupancy Certificate in accordance with law in compliance of the -9- NC: 2025:KHC:20503 WP No. 1163 of 2025 HC-KAR construction strictly adhering to the approved building plan.

(iv) Respondent No.3 - BBMP is hereby directed to forthwith process the petitioner's application seeking occupancy certificate, strictly in accordance with law.

(v) It is made clear that the issuance of the occupancy certificate shall not be withheld merely on the ground that the BBMP is contemplating to file an appeal against the reported judgment.

(vi) If the occupancy certificate 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 NBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17