IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 40178 OF 2018 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

CHALET HOTELS LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT RAHEJA TOWERS, PLOT C, BLOCK G, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI-400050 BRANCH OFFICE AT 75 EPIP AREA, NEXT TO SATYA SAI HOSPITAL, WHITE FIELD, BENGALURU-560066.

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR.VISHWAS SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O LATE SOMAYA MANJAPPA SHETTY …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BANNIKATTI DEEPAK, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA J REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, Location:

DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HIGH COURT OF VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

KARNATAKA

2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU-560002.

3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU-560002.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

SRI. S.N.PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN SECTION 108(A) OF THE KMC ACT AS BEING ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC.

THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 10.03.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

CAV ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to strike down Section 108-A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (henceforth referred to as 'KMC Act, 1976') as being ultra vires the Constitution of India and to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the notification bearing No.Commr./BBMP-DC (Rev)/5675/15-16, Bangalore, dated 09.03.2016 issued by the respondent No.2 and published in the Karnataka Gazette (Extraordinary) in its Issue No.384 Part III, dated 16.03.2016 in so far as it relates to fixing the rate of property tax payable in relation to the properties falling under Category VIII.

2. (i) Petitioner claims that it is the owner of a piece of land in plots bearing Nos.75, 76, 85 to 87, CA plot and plot No.88 part of EPIP Industrial Area situate in Sy.Nos.97, 98, 149, 150 and 151 of Hoodi Village, K.R Puram Hobli, totally measuring 39,512 square metres, which is used for a mixed development project consisting of office block with total built- up area of 1,08,912 sq. ft., retail block with total built-up area of 3,20,690 sq. ft., hotel block with total built-up area of 4,38,692 sq. ft. and car park area of 2,10,478 sq. ft., which is equal to 10,78,772 sq. ft.

(ii) Petitioner contends that prior to March 2000, the property taxes were collected based on the demand made by the respondent No.3 and if any person was aggrieved, the same could be challenged before the respondent No.2. Subsequently, on 13.03.2000, new provisions were introduced for payment of property tax on the basis of self-assessment under which instead of the respondent No.2 raising a demand, the citizens were given option to assess the property tax payable by them after following the due process of such assessment. It contends that with effect from 13.01.2009, the Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Amendment) Act, 2009 came into force by which Section 108-A which provided for a special manner in which the property tax shall be levied with respect to all buildings situate within the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) limits was introduced. This amendment replaced the earlier ordinance namely, the Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Amendment) Ordinance, 2008. As per Section 108-A, respondent No.2 was required to pass a resolution fixing the percentage of property tax to be levied on the taxable annual value of the building. This taxable annual value is to be arrived at by multiplying the unit area value into the total built-up area of the buil