Karnataka High Court
Sri Murali Puttaparthi vs State Of Karnataka on 27 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
WP No. 19090 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 19090 OF 2024 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MURALI PUTTAPARTHI
AGED 56 YEARS,
S/O LATE P. ASWATHA NARAYANA,
R/AT NO.2550, 14TH CROSS,
HSR LAYOUT, 1ST SECTOR,
BANGALORE-560 112.
ALSO AT NO.14304,
SEABRIDGE LN SAN DIAGO,
CA-92128, USA.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIVEKANANDA T.P., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
by AL BHAGYA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
Location: HIGH URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
COURT OF 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA,
KARNATAKA
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
WP No. 19090 of 2024
HC-KAR
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
4. THE BRUHAT BANGALORE
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R. SQUARE,
BANGALORE-560 002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF COMMISSIONER.
5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
TOWN PLANNING (SOUTH),
BBMP COMPLEX, 9TH CROSS,
9TH MAIN ROAD,
JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK,
BANGALORE-560 011.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SPOORTHI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. K.B. MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I.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 ULTRAVIRES UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND
ETC.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
WP No. 19090 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking 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-F declaring it to be
ultravires unconstitutional.
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 4th respondent at Annexure -G;
iii) issue a writ of certiorari to quash the demand
notice bearing LP No.BBMP/Ad.Com./SUT/
0550/24-25, Project No.PRJ/2990/24-25
dated Nil at Annexure -C issued by the
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
HC-KAR
Respondent No.5 in so far as demand towards
scrutiny fee of Rs.45,603/-, License fee of
Rs.9,11,071/-, Betterment fee for building of
Rs.1,07,600/- Betterment Fee for Sital Area of
Rs.7,09,128/-, security deposit of
Rs.1,07,600/-, Ground Rent(including CGST &
SGST) of Rs.8,44,692/- Cess towards BWSSB
in a sum of Rs.70,912/-, Cess towards Ring
Road in a sum of Rs.70,912/- Cess towards
Improving the slums in a sum of Rs.35,456/-,
cess towards MRTS in a sum of Rs.3,54,564/-,
5% levy on service charges in a sum of
Rs.26,592/- are concerned.
iv) issue Writ of Certiorari or similar Writ, order
or direction to 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 4th
Respondent;
v) 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 1st
Respondent at Annexure-J in so far as 18-A(i)
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
HC-KAR
and (iv) of Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 is
concerned.
vi) grant an order, direction or writ in the nature
of Certiorari quashing the Notification issued
by the 1st Respondent bearing No. UDD 3 TTP
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;
vii) 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).
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
HC-KAR
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, (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:23222
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."
3. In the present writ petition, the core issue raised
stands substantially covered and decided by the
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
HC-KAR
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
development plans, in view of the explanatory 'Note' to
Table I of Rule 37-A.
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
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.
7. In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass
the following;
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:23222
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned demand notice dated
Nil issued by respondent No.5 as per
Annexure-C is hereby set-aside.
(iii) Respondent Nos.4 and 5 - BBMP are
hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan
as the case may be.
(iv) Respondent Nos.4 and 5 - BBMP are
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:23222
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
NBM
