BENGALURU: In a big relief to residents, builders and developers in Bengaluru, and a blow to BBMP, the Karnataka High Court held that levying ground rent, licence fee, building licence fee, scrutiny fee, security deposit and lake rejuvenation fee under bylaws is illegal.
“Framing of building bylaws is dealt with under Sections 295 and 423 of the KMC Act. Nowhere do the sections empower framing of bylaws for imposition of any fee by the Corporation. The only place the word ‘fee’ is found enumerated in Section 423 which deal with the power to make bylaws, is in case of burial and crematoria, that is maintained by the Corporation... there is no power under the Act to impose the impugned levies,” the court noted.
Observing that “even a rupee cannot be taken from a citizen as fee except in accordance with law”, Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that the bylaws under which those fees/ service charges on labour cess are held ultravires the Act, and are rendered unenforceable.
Explaining the illegalities, the court said, “What became agonising was the circulars dated September 4, 2015, January 27, 2017, and March 30, 2017, whereby the impugned fees were demanded exorbitantly by linking it to guidance value. This has left citizens bleeding and business houses fleeing...” The court gave an illustration that guidance value in the Central Business District (CBD) has skyrocketed and is lower on the outskirts of Bengaluru. Therefore, it is arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Ground rent, which is imposed for stocking building materials on public land, is paid by builders though they have their own space in the construction area to stock materials, and would not be using public space, the judge explained. The court quashed the circulars dated September 4, 2015, January 27, 2017, and March 30, 2017, invoking Section 18(1)(A) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, demanding Lake Rejuvenation Fee. This section only empowers the BDA to levy the fee and not the BBMP, and made it applicable to all applications coming in for building licence and sanction of plan.
Allowing a batch of petitions filed by residents and developers, the court clarified that petitioners who have deposited certain amounts, are entitled to be refunded. Those who have paid to the Corporation under protest, shall be entitled to refund and are at liberty to give representation to BBMP, which would consider a refund in accordance with law and the findings of the court. BBMP should pass appropriate orders within 12 weeks from the date, the court added.