Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Order Directing BBMP to Clear Modified Building Plan

A division bench of the Karnataka High Court has set aside a single-judge order that directed the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to approve a modified building plan submitted by a commercial developer, delivering significant legal clarity to municipal authorities.

The ruling addresses the legal parameters governing urban construction approvals and statutory compliance timelines across urban local bodies in the state. The case centres on a dispute involving a 5,630-square-metre property spread across adjacent parcels on Dhanvantari Road and Subedar Chatram Road within the Majestic commercial hub.

Sangam Enterprises had sought to utilize a Transferable Development Rights certificate dated April 18, 2015, to expand its commercial asset. The developer's proposed modification intended to increase building height from 15 metres to 29.6 metres while securing a 50% relaxation in setback norms, relying on a civic body circular issued in 2009. Although the Karnataka Fire and Emergency Services Department issued a no-objection certificate on October 7, 2017, the municipal corporation withheld plan sanction.

Following earlier litigation rounds, the firm initiated fresh proceedings in 2023. A single-judge bench subsequently ruled in favour of the petitioner on May 29, 2024, directing the civic body to consider sanctioning the modified layout submitted initially on March 28, 2014.

Challenging this decision, the municipal corporation moved the division bench through a writ appeal. Counsel for the civic administration argued that the revised proposal failed to satisfy norms outlined under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Benefit of Development Rights) Rules, 2016, which were formally notified on March 4, 2017. Conversely, the firm maintained that its application warranted evaluation based on regulations operative at the time of initial submission in March 2014.

Examining statutory provisions and judicial precedents, the division bench observed that building plan approvals are governed by regulations operative on the date sanction is formally granted rather than the date of application filing. The bench noted that the developer had applied for fire clearance on February 22, 2017, subsequent to statutory amendments under Section 14B of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act that restricted setback relaxations to 25%.

Consequently, the court concluded that the modified proposal violated prevailing planning norms, rendering the single-judge directive unsustainable. With the reversal of the order, a related civil contempt petition filed against senior civic officials for alleged non-compliance stands formally closed.