BharatTaxGST

Smt Jayamma K vs. State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/25630/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01053794202402 July 2025Bench: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM12 pages
For Petitioner: SRI VIVEKANANDA T.P., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. SPOORTHY V., H.C.G.P. FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI K.B. MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND R-4

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Before: SMT. JAYAMMA K. SMT. K. TRIVENI,

The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: i) issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the Karnataka Municipal Corporations and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2021 Act No.1/2022 dated 13.01.2022 enacted by the second respondent published through notification bearing No.DPAL 50 SHASANA 2021 gazetted on 13.01.2022 at Annexure-J declaring it to be ultravires and unconstitutional. In so far as petitioner only; ii) issue writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the Office Order bearing No.ADTP/PR/ 461/ 2021-22 dated 09.03.2022 issued by the third respondent at Annexure -K; iii) issue a writ of certiorari to quash the demand note challan No.BBMP/EoDB/CH/17585/24-25, Project No.PRJ/1430/22-23, LP No.BBMP/Addl.Dir/JDSOUTH/0041/22-23 dated 13.08.2024 at Annexure –F issued by the Respondent No.4 in so far as demand towards license fee of Rs.93,46,63/-, Betterment fee for building of Rs.3,15,182/- security deposit of Rs.15,75,907/-, Ground Rent(including CGST & SGST) of Rs.1,37,86,286/-, Cess towards BWSSB in a sum of Rs.31,519/-, Cess towards Ring Road in a sum of Rs.31,519/-, Cess towards Improving the slums in a sum of Rs.15,760/-, cess towards MRTS in a sum of HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25390 Rs.1,57,591/-, and labour cess of Rs.80,13,604/- are concerned; iv) issue Writ of Certiorari or similar Writ, order or direction to quash the Circular bearing No.He.Ni.Ka.Pa.Ko/ P.R/320/2020-21 dated 14.08.2020 at Annexure-L issued by the 3rd Respondent; v) Issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash provisions of section 18-A of Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 brought into effect by Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 by the 1st Respondent at Annexure-M in so far as 18- A(i) and (iv) of Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 is concerned. In so far as petitioner only; vi) 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-N in so far as the amended Rule 37-A and Rule 37-C are concerned; vii) issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents deemed fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

2.

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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25390 referred to as “Sunderam Shetty”), have comprehensively adjudicated the issue involved and settled the controversy.

3.

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. 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25390

5.

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.

6.

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.

7.

Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 13.08.2024 issued by respondent No.4 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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25390 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. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK 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.