Sri B K Thyagaraj @ B K Thyagarajan vs. The State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sri. B.K. Thyagaraj, filed a writ petition challenging Section 18-A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, as amended, along with several notifications, circulars, and government orders. These challenged provisions and issuances pertained to various charges including labour welfare cess, ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, license fees, and scrutiny fees. The petitioner sought to quash these levies and sought a direction to the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to issue a sanctioned building plan without insisting on these charges. The primary challenge was against a demand notice dated March 6, 2021, issued by the Assistant Director, Town Planning (Mahadevapura), BBMP.
Held
The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court noted that similar issues concerning the levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under relevant bye-laws, as well as the linking of fees under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, to market/guidance value under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, have been comprehensively adjudicated and settled by coordinate benches in previous writ petitions (W.P.No.23086/2022 and W.P.No.36017/2018). These prior judgments had declared such levies as ultra vires the Act and quashed related government circulars and bye-laws. Consequently, the present petition was found to be squarely covered by these binding decisions. The impugned demand notice dated March 6, 2021, was set aside, and the BBMP was directed to issue a fresh/modified plan and process the petitioner's application for a building license and sanction of the building plan strictly in accordance with law, without withholding approval based on the pendency of any appeal by the BBMP.
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? The petitioner argued that these provisions, along with subsequent notifications and circulars, impose illegal and arbitrary charges. 2. Whether the notifications, circulars, and government orders mandating the collection of labour welfare cess, ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, license fees, and scrutiny fees are illegal and without jurisdiction? The petitioner contended that these levies are not authorized by the parent Act. 3. Whether the demand notice dated March 6, 2021, issued by the BBMP is illegal and without jurisdiction? The petitioner sought to quash this notice and sought a direction to issue a sanctioned building plan without these charges. The respondents, represented by the State and BBMP, did not record specific arguments in the judgment, but the court's decision implies that their contentions were addressed by prior judgments.
Sections Cited
Section 18-A, Rule 37-A, Section 45-B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner, 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. 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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23052 Respondent No.4 (Annexure-H) in so far the Petitioner is 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 Petitioner is concerned. vi) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated 06/03/2021, bearing No.BBMP/Ad.Com/MDP/1182/2020-21, 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, excess security deposit, 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. 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 with respect to the Schedule Property without insisting the Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site, HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23052 excess security deposit, 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, 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23052
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.
In light of the authoritative pronouncements, the present petition does not warrant separate adjudication and is liable to be allowed in terms of the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23052 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 06.03.2021 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:23052 (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.: 54
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.