Mr. Takesh D Malgonkar vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Mr. Takesh D Malgonkar and Mrs. Chandrakala V Malgonkar, represented by their GPA holder M/s. NVT Quality Lifestyle Homes LLP, filed a writ petition challenging various provisions of the BBMP Act, Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, and a circular issued by the BBMP. Specifically, they sought to declare Sections 240A and 240C of the BBMP Act, Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, amendments to Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, and a BBMP circular dated 14.8.2020 as unconstitutional and illegal. They also sought to quash an officer order dated 9.12.2021 and a demand note issued by the Assistant Director, Town Planning Department, BBMP, concerning various charges including ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, and license fees.
Held
The Court held that the issues raised in the present writ petition are squarely covered by previous binding decisions of coordinate benches. Specifically, in the case of 'Sunderam Shetty', levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under the relevant bye-laws were declared ultra vires the Act, and certain Government Circulars were quashed. In the case of 'M/s Sapthagiri Shelters', Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022 and Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024 were struck down for illegally linking fees under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, to market/guidance value under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. Related circulars were quashed, and Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, pertaining to Ground Rent, was declared invalid. Consequently, the present petition did not warrant separate adjudication and was liable to be allowed in terms of the operative directions issued in the aforesaid writ petitions. The impugned demand notice was set aside, and BBMP was directed to issue fresh/modified plans and process the building license and sanction plan applications strictly in accordance with law, without withholding them based on contemplation of an appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether Sections 240A and 240C inserted by Karnataka Ordinance No.8 of 2021 into the BBMP Act are unconstitutional? 2. Whether Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, is unconstitutional? 3. Whether the amendment to Rule 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, is ultra vires and unconstitutional? 4. Whether the circular dated 14.8.2020 issued by Respondent No.4 (BBMP) is illegal and unconstitutional? 5. Whether the demand note issued by Respondent No.5 (Assistant Director, Town Planning) is illegal, without jurisdiction, and arbitrary, particularly concerning ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, license fees, and other levies? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that the aforementioned sections, rules, circulars, and demand note are unconstitutional and illegal, seeking their quashing and a direction to issue the sanction plan without insisting on the disputed charges. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific contentions from the revenue or state respondents. However, it refers to previous binding decisions that have adjudicated similar issues.
Sections Cited
Section 240A, Section 240C, Section 18-A, Rule 37-A, Rule 37-C, Section 45-B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:- “a. Issue a writ in the nature of a declaration or any other writ, order, direction of similar nature declaring Sections 240A and 240C inserted by way of amendment to the BBMP Act vide Karnataka Ordinance No.8 of 2021 unconstitutional;
b. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order, direction of similar nature quashing the Officer Order dated 9.12.2021 issued by Respondent No.4 produced at Annexure-C unconstitutional. Vide HE.NI.NA. YO/PR/461/2021-22. c. Issue a writ in the nature of declaration or any other similar writ, order or direction declaring that Section 18-A of Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 Annexure-E as unconstitutional; HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25254 d. Issue a writ in the nature of declaration or any other similar writ, order or direction declaring that amendment to Rule 37-A and 37-C of Karnataka Planning Authority Rules issued by Respondent No.1 vide No.UDD 3 TTP 2015 dated 25.02.2020 is ultra vires and unconstitutional; Annexure-D
e. Issue a writ in the nature of declaration or any other similar writ, order or direction declaring that Circular dated 14.8.2020 issued by Respondent No.4 bearing number He.Ne.Ka.Pa.Ko/P.R/320/2020-21 at Annexure-F is illegal and unconstitutional;
f. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other similar order, writ, or direction quashing Demand Note vide L.P No.BBMP/ Ad.Com./MDP/0587/24-25 issued by Respondent No.5 produced at Annexure-B insofar it is concerned to ground rent, GST on ground rent, Betterment charges for building, betterment charges for site, excess security deposit, received license fee, revised scrutiny fee, cess for water supply scheme, surcharges for formation outer ring road, cess for improvement of slum, surcharges for mass rapid transport system, labour cess and etc., as illegal, without juri iction and arbitrary. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25254 g. Issues a writ or order or direction by way of mandamus directing the respondent No.4 and 5 BBMP to issue the sanction plan for construction of the building in the schedule property without insisting the ground rent GST on ground rent, betterment charges for building, betterment charges for site, excess security deposit, revised license fee, revised scrutiny fee, cess for water supply scheme, surcharges for formation outer ring road, cess for improvement of slum surcharge for mass rapid transport system, labour cess and etc., and h. Pass any such other orders as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the fact and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”
The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, in W.P.No.23086/2022 and connected matters(herein referred to as “M/s Sapthagiri Shelters”) as well as W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters(herein referred to as “Sunderam Shetty”), have comprehensively adjudicated the issue involved and settled the controversy. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25254
In Sunderam Shetty and connected cases, the Co-ordinate Bench declared the levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under the relevant bye-laws as ultra vires the Act and quashed the Government Circulars dated 04.09.2015, 27.01.2017, and 30.03.2017. and similarly, in M/s Sapthagiri Shelters and connected matters, the Co- ordinate Bench struck down the Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022 and Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024, holding that linking fees under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965 to market/guidance value under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 is illegal. It further quashed all related Circulars and declared Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, pertaining to Ground Rent, as invalid.
The issues raised in the present writ petition are squarely covered by the above binding decisions, wherein the relevant bye-laws and government circulars have been set aside. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25254
In light of the authoritative pronouncements, the present petition does not warrant separate adjudication and is liable to be allowed in terms of the operative directions issued in the aforesaid writ petitions.
Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned demand notice dated Nil issued by respondent No.5 as per Annexure-B 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 directed to forthwith process the petitioners' application seeking building license and sanction of the building plan, strictly in accordance with law. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25254 (v) It is made clear that the issuance of the building license and approval of the 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 subject to the outcome of any appeal that may be filed by the BBMP against the said judgment.
Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
NBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 32
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.