BharatTaxGST

M/S Surya Shakti Greenlands PVT LTD vs. State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/8418/2021HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01017399202126 June 2025Bench: SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI RAJU S., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI H.K. KENCHE GOWDA, AGA 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: DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: a) issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the demand notice L.P. No.BBMP/Add.Com./MDP/1302/2020-21, dated 09.04.2021 at ANNEXURE-C issued by respondent No.4 in so far as the demand of Rs.12,03,690.82/- towards Ground rent including CGST and SGST, Rs.5,70,041/- towards security deposit, Rs.12,98,279.78/- towards License fee Rs.64,913.99/- towards scrutiny fee, Rs.23,35,796.04/- towards fee u/s of KTCP act 1961 (Betterment fee) site area, Rs.5,70,041/- towards fee u/s of KTCP (betterment fee) building area, Rs.9064.55/- towards 1% service charges on labour cess to BBMP, Rs.2,95,867.50/- towards Ring road (BDA) Rs.1,47,933.75/- towards improving Slums(KSCB), Rs.7,39,668.75/- towards Mass Rapid Transport System (BDA) 5 % levy service charges payable to BBMP of Rs. 77,859.87/- and Rs.8,97,390/- towards II Karnataka State Building and other Construction Workers Welfare Board labour cess are concerned. b) issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the 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-E in so far as 18- A(i) and (iv) of Karnataka Act No.23 of 2004 is concerned. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22590 c) grant an order, direction or writ in the nature or Certiorari quashing the notification issued by the 1st Respondent bearing No. dated 25.02.2020 as contained in Annexure-F in so far as the amended Rule 37-A and Rule 37-C are concerned. d) Issue a writ or Certiorari quashing the Government order issued by the 2nd Respondent bearing dated 18.01.2007 and the corrigendum bearing no. G.O.No.LD 300 LET 2006 dated 28.02.2007 directing upfront collection of labour welfare cess as contained in ANNEXURE-G. e) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring that Bye-law no.309 in the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws, 2003 framed under the Karnataka Muncipal Corporations act as unconstitutional, arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires. f) issue writ of mandamus or similar writ or order or direction directing the respondent No.3 and 4 to issue building fresh plan and license pursuant to their communication issued by the respondent No.4 without insisting for payment of amount mentioned above. g) issue any other appropriate writ or order of direction 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 referred to as “Sunderam Shetty”), have HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22590 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. and 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:22590

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 09.04.2021 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-C is hereby set-aside. (iii) Respondent- BBMP is hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. (iv) Respondent- BBMP is hereby directed to forthwith process the petitioner's HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22590 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 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 HDK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8

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.