Basavanagouda M Patil vs. The State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Basavanagouda M. Patil, filed a writ petition challenging Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, as amended by Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004, specifically sub-sections (i) and (iv). The petition also sought to quash a notification dated 25.02.2020 regarding amended Rules 37-A and 37-C, a circular dated 14.08.2020 from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) concerning these rules, a circular dated 04.09.2015, a government order dated 18.01.2007 and its corrigendum dated 28.02.2007 mandating upfront collection of Labour Welfare cess, and a demand notice dated 27.01.2021 from the Assistant Director, Town Planning (East), BBMP. The demand notice included charges for ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, excess security deposit, excess license fee, cess for Lake Rejuvenation, compound wall, road cutting, and administration charges on Labour cess. The petitioner sought to have these levies declared illegal and arbitrary and sought a modified sanction plan without these charges.
Held
The Court held that the issues raised in the present writ petition were squarely covered by the binding decisions of coordinate benches in W.P.No.23086/2022 (M/s Sapthagiri Shelters) and W.P.No.36017/2018 (Sunderam Shetty). In Sunderam Shetty, levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under relevant bye-laws were declared ultra vires the Act, and related government circulars were quashed. In 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 to market/guidance value under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, and related circulars were quashed. Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, pertaining to Ground Rent, was also declared invalid. Consequently, the Court found no need for separate adjudication of the present petition. The impugned demand notice dated 27.01.2021 was set aside. The BBMP was directed to issue a fresh/modified plan and process the petitioner's application for building license and plan sanction strictly in accordance with law. The issuance of the license and plan approval was not to be withheld pending any appeal by the BBMP, but would be subject to the outcome of such an appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether Section 18-A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, as amended, are ultra vires the Act? 2. Whether the notification dated 25.02.2020, amending Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, is illegal? 3. Whether the circulars dated 14.08.2020 and 04.09.2015 issued by the BBMP, and the government order dated 18.01.2007 and its corrigendum dated 28.02.2007, mandating upfront collection of Labour Welfare cess, are legally sustainable? 4. Whether the demand notice dated 27.01.2021 issued by the BBMP, levying various charges including ground rent, GST on ground rent, betterment charges, and other fees, is illegal and arbitrary? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the impugned provisions, notifications, circulars, and demand notice were illegal, without jurisdiction, and arbitrary. The petitioner relied on previous judgments of the High Court in W.P.No.23086/2022 (M/s Sapthagiri Shelters) and W.P.No.36017/2018 (Sunderam Shetty) which had dealt with similar levies and had set aside related bye-laws and circulars. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents. However, the respondents are the State of Karnataka and the BBMP, who issued the impugned orders and notices.
Sections Cited
Section 18-A, Rule 37-A, Rule 37-C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The captioned petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs: "Wherefore the Petitioners respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: a. 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 A) in so far as Section 18-A(i) and (iv) of the Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 is concerned:
b. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Notification issued by Respondent No.1 bearing No.UDD 3 TTP 2015 dated 25.02.2020 in so far HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 as the amended Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned (Annexure B) c. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Circular dated 14.08.2020 bearing No. He.Ni.Ka.Pa.Ko/P.R./320/2020-21 issued by Respondent No.4 in so far as the amended Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned (Annexure C). d. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order direction quashing the Circular dated 04.09.2015, bearing No. Heninayo/ JD (N)/DM3/PR/320/2015-16 issued by the respondent No 4 (Annexure D). e. Issue writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction 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 Respondent No 2 mandating upfront collection of Labour Welfare cess (Annexure E) in so far the petitioner is concerned f. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Demand Notice issued by Respondent No.5 bearing No. BBMP/Ad Com/EST/0794/20-21 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 dated 27.01.2021 in so far as the Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, Betterment charges for building and site, excess security deposit, excess license fee, cess for Lake Rejuvenation, Compound Wall, Road cutting, 1% Administration charges on Labour Labour cess and etc are concerned as illegal without juri iction and arbitrary (Annexure F) g. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No 4 and 5 BBMP to issue modified sanction plan with respect to the schedule property without insisting the Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, Betterment charges for building and site, excess security deposit, excess license fee, cess for Lake Rejuvenation, Compound Wall, Road cutting 1% Administration charges on are Labour, Labour cess and etc., in so far as petitioners are concerned. h. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction declaring the ground rent levied on the Petitioners for obtaining plan sanction is bad in law, since the Petitioners are not using the public land/property for stocking of building materials for construction purpose in do far as petitioners are concerned. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 i. Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant, including cost of the Petitioner, 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 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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 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 operative directions issued in the aforesaid writ petitions.
Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 27.01.2021 issued by respondent No.5 as per Annexure-F 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. (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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21730 Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
VMB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 24
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.