S.R. CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these petitions, the respective petitioners have sought for issue of writ of certiorari to quash the circular dated 28.09.2012 issued by the Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike ('BBMP' for short). The petitioners have also sought to quash the demand notices of different dates which are issued to the respective petitioners.

(2.) The petitioners are all owners of different extents of lands which are described in their respective petitions. The said lands were earlier situate within the jurisdiction of 7 City Municipal Council, one Town Municipal Council and 110 villages which were included within the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike i.e. the larger urban area so as to constitute the BBMP under the notification dated 16.01.2007. On the said area coming into the larger urban area of BBMP and according to BBMP, on finding that several properties therein did not have proper infrastructure, the same was to be provided in these areas. As it would involve huge expenditure, the improvement charges are sought to be imposed on the property owners and collect the same. Initially when such demand was made as pre-requisite for change of khatha, such action was questioned in W.P.No.5035/2008 and connected petitions. While disposing those petitions on 21.07.2008, this Court was of the view that in the absence of Rules, such demand cannot be made.

(3.) Thereafter the Rules were framed and the improvement charges were levied and sought to be recovered prior to change of khatha. Being aggrieved by the same, the landowners had once again assailed it in W.P.No.18014/2011 and connected petitions which were disposed of on 20.04.2012. Though the power to levy was upheld, the method and manner of determination of improvement charges was found fault with and the matter was ordered to be reconsidered. Though the BBMP has filed an appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.A. No.2954/2012 and the same is stated to be pending consideration and refund of the collected amount is stayed, the BBMP acting on the direction of the learned Single Judge has re-worked the imposition of improvement charges after issuing the circular dated 28.09.2012. The petitioners are therefore before this Court assailing the said circular and also the demand made based on such circular.