SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 528

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM, J.
Sri.Kailash Ashrama Mahasamsthana Trust - Petitioner 
Versus 
The State Of Karnataka - Respondent 
WRIT PETITION NO. 1570 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 4118 OF 2025 (LB-BMP), WRIT PETITION NO. 4238 OF 2025 (LB-BMP), WRIT PETITION NO. 4787 OF 2025 (LB-BMP), WRIT PETITION NO. 5383 OF 2025 (LB-BMP), WRIT PETITION NO. 6002 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)
Decided on : 16-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Sudhakar G V, Advocate
For the Respondent:SRI. H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, SRI.K.B.MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE

The Court declared the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Amendment Act, 2021 and related demands unconstitutional, emphasizing the illegality of fee linkage to market value and ensuring no double charges for planning approvals.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) - Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Karnataka Act No. 37 of 2024) - Constitutionality challenged - The court found that these acts are ultra vires the constitution, setting aside both acts and several related demands - The linkage of fees to market values was held illegal - Previous fee collections cannot be exceeded for new plans. (Paras 8-10)

(B) Quashing Notices - The court quashed demand notices related to ground rent, license fees, and other charges as illegal and arbitrary based on overreach of municipal powers - Clarification provided on applicability of development planning rules to plots exceeding a specified area. (Paras 9-12)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought reliefs against the legality of certain acts and notices issued by municipal authorities that imposed unreasonable fees and requirements for building permits. The court had earlier ruled similar challenges in related writ petitions.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, quashing the amendments and notices, thereby ensuring a reassessment of fees and permitting processes without unlawful levies.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the amendments and fees imposed contravened constitutional provisions and previous court rulings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the illegality of linking fees to market rates and ruled that previously collected fees should not be charged again for subsequent approvals. It confirmed the applicability of planning provisions solely to larger plots, thus rectifying municipal overreach.

Result: Writ petitions allowed; notices set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek quashing of various legislative and administrative actions. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. previous rulings impact current case with substantial overlap in legal reasoning. (Para 7 , 8)
3. certain provisions and fees deemed illegal, affecting smaller development projects. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. writ petitions allowed, directing issuance of building approvals. (Para 12)

ORDER :

SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM, J.

The petitioner in W.P.No.1570/2025 is seeking for the following reliefs;

"i) Grant an order declaring that the entire Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) notified on 13/01/2022 (Annexure-R) as being ultra vires the constitution WP No. 4238 of 2025 HC-KAR AND 3 OTHERS in so far, petitioner is concerned in so far, the petitioner is concerned.

ii) To declare that Karnataka Municipal Corporations And Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) notified on 13/01/2022 (Annexure-R) is in violation/contrary to the decision of this Hon'ble Court in W.P No.4601/2020 (LB-BMP) which is at Annexure-P.

iii) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the office order no. HaNiNaYo/PR/461/2021-22 dated 09/03/2022 issued by Respondent No.3 as (Annexure-S) in so far, the Petitioner is concerned.

iv) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Section 18 -A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 brought into effect by Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 (Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 1998) as contained in (Annexure-K) insofar as Section 18 -A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 is concerned.

v) 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-J) insofar as the inserted Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned.

vi) Issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the circular dated 14/08/2020, bearing No. He.Ni.Ka.Pa.Ko/ P.R/320/2020-21 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure-L) in so far the petitioner is concerned.

vii) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the notification issued by the 1st respondent bearing no. UDD 23 TTP 2020 (E) dated 21/06/2021 as contained in (Annexure-M) insofar as the inserted Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned

viii) Issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the circular dated 24/06/2021, bearing No. He.Ni.Na.Yo/P.R/320/2020-21 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure-N) in so far the petitioner is concerned.

ix) To declare that the entire Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023 notified on 16/08/2024 vide Notification bearing No.DPAL 36 Shasana 2023, Bengaluru issued by the Respondent No.2 (Annexure-T1) as being ultra vires the constitution of India.

x) Issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated 27/11/2024, bearing No.BBMP/ Ad.COM/WST/0613/24-25, issued by the respondent No.4 (Annexure-D) for demanding in so far it is concerned to Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, License fee, scrutiny fee, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site, security deposit, Lake Rejuvenation fee, cess for water supply scheme, surcharge for formation outer ring road, cess for improvement of slum, labour cess and etc., as illegal, without jurisdiction and arbitrary.

xi) Issue a writ or order or direction by way of mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 and 4 BBMP to issue the sanction plan for construction of the building in the Schedule Property without insisting the Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, License fee, scrutiny fee, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site security deposit, lake rejuvenation fee, cess for water supply scheme, surcharge for formation outer ring road, cess for improvement of slum and surcharge for mass rapid transport system, labour ces

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top