M/S Universal Flexibles Private LTD. vs. The State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/2637/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01006036202518 June 2025Bench: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM12 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SUDHAKAR G V., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA., AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI. K.B.MONESH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Universal Flexibles Private Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022), and subsequent amendments and notifications. The petitioner sought to declare these acts and related office orders, notifications, and circulars as ultra vires the Constitution and contrary to previous court decisions. Specifically, the petitioner challenged the imposition of various charges including ground rent, GST on ground rent, license fee, scrutiny fee, betterment charges, security deposit, lake rejuvenation fee, and other cesses and surcharges, as demanded by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) through a demand notice dated January 22, 2025. The petitioner also sought a mandamus to issue a sanction plan for their commercial building without these insisted charges.

Held

The Court noted that the core issues raised in the present writ petition were substantially covered by a coordinate bench's judgment in W.P.No.23086/2022 and connected matters. Following that precedent, the Court held that the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022) and the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024) were quashed and set aside. The Court also declared that Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, read with Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, were applicable only to development plans for plots exceeding 20,000 square meters. It was further declared that if fees were already collected for land use change or layout plan approval, no further fee would be collected for subsequent development plans. The linkage of levies to market or guidance value was declared illegal, and all consequential circulars and demand notices were quashed. Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, concerning 'Ground Rent', was also struck down. Consequently, the impugned demand notice dated January 22, 2025, was set aside. The BBMP was directed to issue a fresh/modified plan and process the petitioner's application for a building license and sanction strictly in accordance with law, without withholding it due to any contemplated appeal. However, any issued license/plan would be subject to the outcome of a potential appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) and the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Karnataka Act No. 37 of 2024) are ultra vires the Constitution and liable to be quashed? The petitioner argued that these acts, along with Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town & Country Planning Act, 1961, and related rules and circulars, were illegal and arbitrary, particularly concerning the levy of various charges. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment of a coordinate bench. The respondents' specific arguments are not detailed in the provided text, but their role was to defend the validity of the impugned legislation and actions. 2. Whether the demand notice dated January 22, 2025, issued by the Assistant Director Town Planning (East), BBMP, demanding various charges including ground rent, GST on ground rent, license fee, and other betterment charges, is illegal and without jurisdiction? The petitioner contended that these demands were arbitrary and contrary to law. The respondents' arguments against this are not explicitly stated.

Sections Cited

Section 18-A, Rule 37-A, Rule 37-C, Section 45-B, Clause 3.8

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 WP No. 2637 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 2637 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: M/S UNIVERSAL FLEXIBLES PRIVATE LTD., INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.2C, DYVASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, 4TH CROSS, WHITEFIELD CROSS ROAD, MAHADEVAPURA POST, BANGALORE-560 048 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI. VENKATESH S. AYER S/O. K.R.S NARAYANAN AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUDHAKAR G V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND LEGISLATION Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 WP No. 2637 of 2025 VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE N.R SQUARE, BANGALORE-560002. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING- (EAST) BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, 22ND FLOOR, UTILITY BUILDING, MAYOHALL, M.G ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA., AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI. K.B.MONESH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ENTIRE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AND CERTAIN OTHER LAW (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2021 (KARNATAKA ACT NO. 01 OF 2022) NOTIFIED ON 13.01.2022 (ANNX-R) AS BEING ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION IN SO FAR THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN SO FAR THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 WP No. 2637 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: i) Grant an order declaring that the entire Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) notified on 13/01/2022 (Annexure-R) as being ultra vires the Constitution in so far, the Petitioner is concerned in so far, the Petitioner is concerned.

ii) To declare that Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No. 01 of 2022) notified on 13/01/2022 (Annexure-R) is in violation/contrary to the decision of this Hon'ble Court in W.P No.4601/2020 (LB-BMP) which is at Annexure-P.

iii) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the Office Order No. HaNiNaYo/PR/461/2021-22 dated 09/03/2022 issued by Respondent No.3 as contained in (Annexure-S) in so far, the Petitioner is concerned. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 iv) 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-K) insofar as Section 18- A(1) and (iv) of the Karnataka Act No. 23 of 2004 is concerned;

v) 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-J) insofar as the inserted Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned;

vi) 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.3 (Annexure-L) in so far the Petitioner is concerned.

vii) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Notification issued by the 1st Respondent bearing No. UDD 23 TTP 2020 (E) dated HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 21/06/2021 as contained in (Annexure-M) insofar as the inserted Rule 37-A and 37-C is concerned;

viii) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the circular dated 24/06/2021, bearing No. He.Ni.Na.Yo/P.R/320/2020-21 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure-N) in so far the petitioner is concerned.

ix) to declare that the entire Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and Certain other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023 notified on 16/08/2024 vide Notification bearing No.DPAL 36 Shasana 2023, Bengaluru issued by the Respondent No.2 (Annexure-T1) as being ultra vires the Constitution of India"

x) issue a writ or order by way of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated 22/01/2025, bearing No.BBMP/Ad.Com/EST/0919/24-25, issued by the Respondent No.4 (Annexure-D) for demanding in so far it is concerned to Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, License fee, scrutiny fee, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site, security deposit, Lake Rejuvenation fee, Cess for water supply HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 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.

xi) Issue a writ or order or direction by way of mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 and 4 BBMP to issue the sanction plan for construction of the commercial Building in the Schedule Property without insisting the Ground rent, GST on Ground rent, License fee, scrutiny fee, Betterment charges for building, Betterment charges for site security deposit, Lake Rejuvenation fee, Cess for water supply scheme, Surcharge for formation outer ring road, Cess for improvement of slum and Surcharge for Mass Rapid Transport System, Labour cess and xii) 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.

2.

It is brought to the notice of this Court that across the Bar, the issue is dealt by the Co-ordinate Bench in the reported judgment in W.P.No.23086/2022 and HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 connected matters. The Co-ordinate Bench, while deciding the issue, has set-aside the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022) and the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023, (Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024). Therefore, this Court deems it fit to cull out the operative portion of the order, which reads as under; "ORDER (i) The writ petitions are partly allowed. (ii) The Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022), is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2023, (Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024), is hereby quashed and set aside. (iv) It is hereby declared that the provisions contained in Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, read with Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are applicable only in respect of ‘Development Plan’ containing the proposal for construction on plots measuring more than 20,000 square meters in extent HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 and not in respect of plots measuring less than 20,000 square meters. (v) It is hereby declared that if fee has been earlier collected for change of land use or while approving a layout plan, fee shall not be collected for subsequent ‘Development Plan’ in terms of the ‘Note’ found below TABLE I of Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965. (vi) It is hereby declared that the linking of the fee leviable under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, to the ‘market value’ or ‘guidance value’ as determined under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, is illegal. However, liberty is reserved to the respondent-State Government and the BBMP to re-fix a standard after collecting empherical data. (vii) Consequently, all the impugned Circulars which seek to give effect to the Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are hereby quashed and set aside. (viii) It is hereby declared that Clause 3.8 of the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye- laws, 2003, providing for ‘Ground Rent’, is illegal and are accordingly quashed and set aside. (ix) Consequently, all the impugned Demand Notices raised by the respondent-BBMP, in respect of the writ petitioners herein are also quashed and set aside. It would be advisable that the BBMP may come HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 out with a scheme for ‘One Time Settlement’ and settle the levy and collect the fee generally acceptable to the citizens of Bengaluru. This would also augment the present situation."

3.

In the present writ petition, the core issue raised stands substantially covered and decided by the authoritative pronouncement of the coordinate bench, wherein the writ petitions were partly allowed and several consequential reliefs were granted. The Hon’ble Court, in unequivocal terms, quashed and set aside the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Acts of 2021 and 2023 (Karnataka Act Nos.01 of 2022 and 37 of 2024 respectively).

4.

The Court further declared that the provisions under Section 18-A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, read with Rules 37-A and 37-C of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, are applicable only to development proposals concerning plots exceeding 20,000 square meters, and not to smaller plots. Importantly, it was also held that if a fee has been HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 previously collected for change of land use or approval of layout plan, no further fee shall be levied for subsequent development plans, in view of the explanatory 'Note' to Table I of Rule 37-A.

5.

The Court declared illegal the linkage of such levies to market or guidance value under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, and consequently, quashed all Circulars and demand notices issued to give effect to such unlawful interpretations. Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, imposing 'Ground Rent', was also struck down.

6.

In view of these comprehensive declarations and findings, it is submitted that the controversy raised in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication independently, as it is squarely covered by the binding judgment of the coordinate bench. In the light of the law laid down in reported judgment substantially covering the issue, which is raised in the captioned writ petition, the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 writ petition is liable to be allowed strictly aligning to the operative portion of the said writ petition.

7.

In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 22.01.2025 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-D is hereby set-aside. (iii) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. (iv) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are hereby 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 plan shall not be withheld merely on the ground HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20949 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 subjected to the outcome of any appeal that may be filed by the BBMP against the judgment. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

KLY

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.