Karnataka High Court
M/S A G Ramaiah Reddy Charitable Trust vs State Of Karnataka on 19 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
WP No. 17286 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.17286 OF 2021 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S A G RAMAIAH REDDY CHARITABLE TRUST
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.200/66,
KAIKONDARAHALLI,
CARMELARAM POST,
BANGALORE - 560 035.
2. SRI A.R. SHIVARAM
AGED 65 YEARS,
S/O LATE A.G. RAMAIAH REDDY,
NO.670, 6TH CROSS ROAD,
3RD BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560 034
Digitally signed
by PAVITHRA B 3. SRI K.N. SOMASHEKAR
Location: HIGH AGED 70 YEARS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O LATE NANJAPPA,
4. SMT K T SHARADAMMA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
W/O SRI K N SOMASHEKAR,
5. SRI S NAVEEN KUMAR
AGED 32 YEARS,
S/O SRI. K.N. SOMAHSHEKAR,
PETITION NOS. 3 TO 5 ARE
RESIDING AT
KAIKONDARAHALLI VILLAGE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
WP No. 17286 of 2021
HC-KAR
VARTHUR HOBLI,
BANGALORE EAST TALUK.
REPRESENTED BY P1 TO P5 THEIR
GPA HOLDER,
M/S BREN CORPORATION,
A PROPRIETARY CONCERN,
THIRD FLOOR,
BREN BALAVANA,
PLOT NO.61, 5TH A BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560 095.
BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR,
SRI J BOOPESH REDDY
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VIVEKANANDA T.P., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA,
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R. SQUARE,
BANGALORE - 560 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR
TOWN PLANNING (NORTH)
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
N.R.SQUARE,
BANGALORE - 560 002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SPOORTHY.V, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.S.N.PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADV., FOR R2 AND R3)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
WP No. 17286 of 2021
HC-KAR
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 18-A OF KARNATAKA TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT,
1961 BROUGHT INTO EFFECT BY KARNATAKA CT NO.23 OF 2004 BY
THE R1 AT ANNEXURE-M IN SO FAR AS 18-A(i) AND (iv) OF
KARNATAKA ACT NO.23 OF 2004 IS CONCERNED 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
Petitioners in the captioned petition have sought the
following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or
direction to quash provisions of section 18-A of
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961
brought into effect by Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004
by the lst Respondent at Annexure-M in so far as
18-A(i) and (iv) of Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 is
concerned.
(ii) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of
Certiorari quashing the Notification issued by the lst
Respondent bearing No. UDD 3 TTP 2015 dated
25.02.2020 as contained in ANNEXURE-N in so far
as the amended Rule 37-A and Rule 37- C are
concerned;
(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ of order or
direction to quash quash the Circular bearing No.
He.Ni.Ka.Pa.ko/P.R/320/20202 dated 14.08.2020 at
Annexure-L issued by the 2nd Respondent.
(iv) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ of order or
direction to quash the demand notice No.BBMP /
Addl Dir 110 NORTH/1P/0077/2019-20 dated
23.02.2021 at Annexure -* issued by the
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
respondent No. 3 only in so far as the demand of
Betterment fee of Rs. 46,01,689/- towards building,
Rs.7,54,864/-towards service charges on the levy
of Cess & Surcharge, surcharge of Rs.30,19,455/-
towards Water Supply Scheme, Rs.30,19,455/-
towards formation of Ring Road, Rs.15,09,727/-
towards Improvement of Slums, Rs.75,48636/-
towards Mass Rapid Transport;
(v) Issue any other appropriate writ or order or
direction as 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.
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
(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 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
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
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 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
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
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
Circulars and demand notices issued to give effect to such
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
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.
(ii) The impugned demand notice
dated 23.02.2021 issued by
respondent No.3 as per
Annexure-K is hereby set-aside.
NC: 2025:KHC:21303
HC-KAR
(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 writ appeal against the
reported judgment.
(vi) If the building licence 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
PB
