Karnataka High Court
M/S Koncept Shelters vs State Of Karnataka on 23 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
WP No. 3414 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.3414 OF 2023 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. KONCEPT SHELTERS
OFFICE AT NO.15, 2ND CROSS,
MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560023.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
PERSON/PARTNER
MR. GOVINDARAJU,
S/O G.M. SHANKAR,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VISHWANATH H M., ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by H
K HEMA
Location: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
COURT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
KARNATAKA
4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND
LEGISLATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
WP No. 3414 of 2023
HC-KAR
BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU-560002.
4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
TOWN PLANNING-MAHADEVAPURA
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
RHB COLONY, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560048.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R.1 & R.2;
SRI B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R.3 & R.4.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE DATED 17.10.2022, BEARING
NO.LP NO.BBMP/AD.COM./MDP/0300/22-23 ISSUED BY 4TH
RESPONDENT IN SO FAR IT RELATES DEMAND OF
RS.5,20,665/- TOWARDS GROUND RENT INCLUDING CGST
AND SGST, RS.5,61,580/- TOWARDS LICENSE FEE, RS.39,217/
TOWARDS SCRUTINY FEE, RS.2,75,500/- TOWARDS FEE U/S
18 OF KTCP (BETTERMENT FEE) BUILDING AREA, RS.26,173/-
TOWARDS WATER SUPPLY SCHEME (BWSSB), RS.2,500/-
TOWARDS COMPOUND WALL CHARGES, RS.26,173/- RING
ROAD(BDA), RS.13,087/- TOWARDS IMPROVING SLUMS
(KSCB), RS.1,30,863/- TOWARDS MASS RAPID TRANSPORT
SYSTEM (BDA), 5% LEVY AND COLLECTION SURCHARGE
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
WP No. 3414 of 2023
HC-KAR
PAYABLE BBMP OF RS.10,332/- AND RS.5,04,165/- TOWARDS
II KARNATAKA STATE BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS WELFARE BOARD LABOUR CESS, PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A, 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 captioned petition is filed seeking for the
following reliefs:
"WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully pray
that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this
petition and issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ
or order or direction to;
a. Quash the impugned demand notice dated
17.10.2022, bearing No.LP No.BBMP/Ad.Com./
MDP/0300/22-23 issued by 4th respondent in so far it
relates demand of Rs.5,20,665/- towards Ground
Rent including CGST and SGST, Rs.5,61,580/-
towards License Fee, Rs.39,217/ towards Scrutiny
Fee, Rs.2,75,500/- towards fee u/s 18 of KTCP
(Betterment fee) building area, Rs.26,173/- towards
Water Supply scheme (BWSSB), Rs.2,500/- towards
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
compound wall charges, Rs.26,173/- Ring
Road(BDA), Rs.13,087/- towards improving slums
(KSCB), Rs.1,30,863/- towards Mass Rapid Transport
System (BDA), 5% levy and collection surcharge
payable BBMP of Rs.10,332/- and Rs.5,04,165/-
towards II Karnataka State Building and other
Construction Workers Welfare Board labour cess,
produced at ANNEXURE-A.
b. 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-F declaring it to be ultra-vires and
unconstitutional.
c. Quash the office order bearing No. ADTP/PR/
461/2021-22 dated 09.03.2022 issued by the third
Respondent at ANNEXURE - G;
d. Quash the Circular bearing No.He.Ni.Ka.Pa.Ko/
P.R./320/2020-21 dated 14.08.2020 at
ANNEXURE-H issued by the 3rd Respondent;
e. Quash the 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 1st Respondent at ANNEXURE-J, in so far as
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
18-A (i) and (iv) of Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 is
concerned.
f. Quash the Notification issued by the 1st
Respondent bearing No. UDD 3 TPP 2015 dated
25.02.2020 as contained in ANNEXURE-K in so far
as the amended Rule 37-A and Rule 37-C are
concerned;
g. 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;
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
"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
'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.
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
(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 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."
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
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).
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
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
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.
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.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
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
17.10.2022 issued by respondent No.4 as
per Annexure-A is hereby set-aside.
(iii) Respondent- BBMP hereby directed
to issue modified plan.
(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
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:21746
HC-KAR
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
VMB
