Karnataka High Court
M/S. Embassy Construction Private ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:21503
WP No. 13814 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.13814 OF 2021 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
M/S.EMBASSY CONSTRUCTION
PRIVATE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED
OFFICE AT EMBASSY POINT
1ST FLOOR, NO.150
INFANTRY ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
MR.A.B.MANDANNA
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI KEMPEGOWDA & SRI SANJAY NAIR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by
GAVRIBIDANUR REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
SUBRAMANYA
GUPTA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SREENATH 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA
Location: HIGH DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001
2. BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R.SQUARE
BENGALURU-560 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS
COMMISSIONER
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:21503
WP No. 13814 of 2021
HC-KAR
3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR
TOWN PLANNING (NORTH)
BRUHATH BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R.SQUARE
BENGALURU-560 002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SPOORTHY V., HCGP FOR R-1;
SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UDNER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DECLARE BYE LAW NO.3.9 OF THE BENGALURU MAHANAGARA
PALIKE BUILDING BYE LAWS, 2003 (ANNEXURE-A) IS ULTRA
VIRES AND INCONSISTENT WITH THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL
CORPORATIONS ACT, 1976 AND ALSO ULTRA VIRES AND
INCONSISTENT WITH BYE LAWS NO.3.8 AND 3.10 OF THE
BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BUILDING BYE LAW 2003
AND TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 16.07.2021
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 (ANNEXURE-B) INSOFAR AS IT
RELATES TO DEMANDING PAYMENT AND ETC.
THIS 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 petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, declaring Bye Law No.3.9 of the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye Laws 2003 (Annexure-A), is ultra vires of and inconsistent with the Karnataka Municipal -3- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR Corporations Act, 1976 and also ultra vires of and inconsistent with Bye Laws No.3.8 and 3.10 of the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye Law 2003;
b) Issue a Writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, quashing the Demand Notice dated 16.07.2021, bearing No.BBMP/Addl.Dir/JDNORTH/0023/ 20-21 (Annexure-B), issued by Respondent No.4 in so far as it relates to demanding payment of:
Rs.8,22,637/- towards Scrutiny Fee; Rs.1,64,52,737/- towards License Fee; Rs. 1,52,54,037/- towards Ground Rent and GST payable on Ground Rent;
Rs.87,44,014/- towards Betterment charges on building u/s 18 of KTCP Act; Rs. 87,44,014/- towards Security Deposit; Rs.22,51,982/- towards 1% Service Charges payable to BBMP from Labour Welfare Fund; and Rs. 1,34,02,000/- towards Labour Welfare Fund;
Totally amounting to Rs.6,56,71,421/- (Rupees Six Crore Fifty Six Lakh Seventy One Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty One only); and
c) Award Cost of this Writ Petition;
d) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the -4- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR 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). 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, -5- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR (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 -6- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR 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 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 -7- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR 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 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. -8- NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR
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 writ petition is liable to be allowed strictly aligning to the operative portion of the said writ petition. -9-
NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR
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 16.07.2021 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
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:21503 WP No. 13814 of 2021 HC-KAR 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 GSS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7