The High Court of Karnataka quashed a BBMP order requiring a landowner to furnish a free relinquishment consent for road widening before plan sanction. The court relied on a coordinate bench holding such demands illegal.
File Anx-B demands quashed; Respondent No.3 directed to release plan upon other compliance within 2 months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.6918 OF 2022 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. PRAKASH S.T. S/O LATE THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT NO.126, 100FT. RING ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, BSK 3RD STAGE, 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU-560 085.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJULU NAIDU G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
2
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
SRI. H.DEVENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2020 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT COMMISSIONER BBMP BEARING No.COMMISSIONER/ P.S.R.(G)/5502/2020-21 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has challenged the office Order dated 18.12.2020 issued by the respondent No.2 delegating the power to sign relinquishment deed and rectification relinquishment deed to the Deputy Commissioner (Land Acquisition and TDR) / Special Land Acquisition Officer and the consequent online endorsement /shortfall letter dated 21.02.2021 issued by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in terms of which the petitioner was called upon to furnish a consent letter stating that he would be relinquishing the land required for widening of the road as per Revised Master Plan (RMP) 2015 free of cost before receiving sanctioned plan.
3
the property/site bearing No.126 situate at 100 feet Ring Road, 5th block, 3rd phase extension, Banashankari 3rd stage, Bengaluru. The petitioner filed an application before the respondent No.2 for approval of building plan to put up construction thereon. The respondent No.2 rejected the application due to the following reasons:
4
5
the RMP 2015. The learned counsel submits that the aforesaid order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.9408/2020 and connected cases is pending consideration in W.A. Nos.332/2022 and 333/2022 and companion appeals.
to furnish a consent letter relinquishing the land for road widening as per the Revised Master Plan 2015 map (b) Banashankari free of cost is quashed. Consequently, the respondent No.3 is directed to release the plan in respect of the property of the petitioner if the petitioner has complied with all other requirements, as mentioned in Annexure-B within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order.
Sd/JUDGE
sma
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Collector/Commissioner can demand relinquishment of land free of cost as a condition precedent for plan sanction under RMP 2015.
Whether the order requiring submission of a consent letter for road widening should be quashed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. No.9408/2020 and connected writ petitionsReferred¶31
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI. PRAKASH S.T.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE COMMISSIONER, BBMP
THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
R. NATARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
