Sri. G. Somashekar Reddy vs. The State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Sri. G. Somashekar Reddy and Smt. G. Vijaya, filed a writ petition challenging Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, as amended, and various notifications, circulars, and government orders related to the collection of fees and cess. Specifically, they sought to quash provisions concerning the upfront collection of labour welfare cess, ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, license fees, scrutiny fees, and other cesses. The petitioners also sought a direction to the Bruath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to issue a sanction plan for their building without insisting on these charges. The petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned demand notice dated 13.10.2020 issued by respondent No.5 (BBMP) as per Annexure-D. The Court directed the BBMP to issue a fresh/modified plan and to forthwith process the petitioner’s application seeking a building license and sanction of the building plan strictly in accordance with law. It was clarified that the issuance of the building license and approval of the plan shall not be withheld due to the BBMP contemplating an appeal against the reported judgment, but any issued license/plan would be subject to the outcome of any appeal filed by the BBMP. The Court relied on previous judgments of coordinate benches in W.P.No.23086/2022 (M/s Sapthagiri Shelters) and W.P.No.36017/2018 (Sunderam Shetty), which had comprehensively adjudicated similar issues, declared certain levies ultra vires, and quashed relevant circulars and government orders. The Court found that the issues in the present petition were squarely covered by these binding decisions.
Key Issues
1. Whether Section 18-A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, as amended by Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004, are ultra vires the Act and liable to be quashed? 2. Whether Rule 37-A and 37-C inserted by Notification No. UDD 3 TTP 2015 dated 25/02/2020 are liable to be quashed? 3. Whether the circular dated 04/09/2015 issued by Respondent No.4 (BBMP) and the circular dated 14/08/2020 issued by Respondent No.4 are liable to be quashed? 4. Whether the Government Order dated 18/01/2007 and corrigendum dated 28/02/2007 issued by Respondent No.2, mandating upfront collection of labour welfare cess, are liable to be quashed? 5. Whether the demand notice dated 13/10/2020 issued by Respondent No.5 (BBMP) demanding various charges including Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, Betterment charges, License fee, scrutiny fee, and various cesses, is illegal, without jurisdiction, and arbitrary? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that the impugned provisions, notifications, circulars, and demand notice are illegal and arbitrary, seeking their quashing and a direction to issue the sanction plan without these levies. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents. However, it refers to prior judgments that have adjudicated similar issues.
Sections Cited
Section 18-A, Rule 37-A, Rule 37-C, Section 45-B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SMT. G.VIJAYA DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
Petitioners, in the captioned petition has sought for following reliefs : (i) grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town & Country Planning Act, 1961 brought into effect by Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 (Karnataka Town & Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 1998) as contained in ANNEXURE-G1 insofar as Section 18-A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 is concerned; (ii) 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-G insofar as the inserted Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned; (iii) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the circular dated 04/09/2015, bearing No. Heninayo/JD(N)/DM3/PR/320/2015-16 issued by the Respondent No.4 (Annexure-E) in so far the Petitioner is concerned. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23043 (iv) 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.4 (Annexure-H) in so far the Petitioners are concerned. (v) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the Government order bearing No.LD/300/LET/2006 dated 18/01/2007 and the corrigendum order bearing No.LD/300/LET/2006, dated 28/02/2007 issued by the Respondent No.2 mandating upfront collection of labour welfare cess (Annexure-F) in so far the Petitioners are concerned. (vi) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated 13/10/2020 bearing No.BBMP/Ad.Com/EST/0431/20-21, issued by the Respondent No.5 (Annexure-D) for demanding in so far it is concerned to Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site, revised License fee, revised scrutiny fee, Cess for water supply scheme, Surcharge for formation outer ring road, Cess for improvement of slum, Surcharge for Mass Rapid Transport System, Labour cess and etc., as illegal, without juri iction and arbitrary. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23043 (vii) issue 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, revised License fee, revised scrutiny fee, Cess for water supply scheme, Surcharge for formation outer ring road, Cess for improvement of slum, Surcharge for Mass Rapid Transport System, Labour cess and etc., and (viii) pass any such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances 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.
In Sunderam Shetty and connected cases, the Co-ordinate Bench declared the levies of Ground Rent, HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23043 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. 4. 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:23043
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 13.10.2020 issued by respondent No.5 as per Annexure-D is hereby set-aside. (iii) Respondent - BBMP is hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. (iv) Respondent - BBMP is 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 of the plan shall not be withheld merely on the ground that the BBMP is contemplating to file an appeal against the reported judgment. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23043 (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 SMJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 45
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.