Here is good news for all those planning to purchase land in the 110 villages that were included in the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) some years ago. On Friday, the high court declared illegal the BBMP commissioner’s action in issuing the circular determining the amount of improvement expenses to be collected from the owners or occupiers of the sites or lands as specified according to the circular.
Hearing a batch of petitions filed by landowners challenging the improvement charges, the court said, “The action of the commissioner in issuing the circular determining the amount of improvement expenses to be collected from the owners or occupiers of the sites or lands as specified according to the circular is declared as illegal.”
According to the circular, the commissioner had fixed different rates for the sites. The improvement charge for 1 sq m for a 30x40 site is Rs200; for a 60x40 site, Rs300; for a site above 60x40 site, more than Rs400.
The court termed the circular illegal and said that the BBMP is free to undertake a fresh exercise to fix the rate. It said that during the pendency of the case, any landowner who had paid improvement charges can seek a refund.
In 2010, after the 110 villages were added as new areas under the BBMP, the former commissioner, Siddaiah had issued a circular and directed officials of the BBMP’s revenue department to collect improvement charges from residents.
The charges—which were for the provison of water supply, roads and drainage—were approved by the BBMP council on December 29, 2010.
“It cannot be said that the owners of the smaller sites are always economically weak and invariably use lesser infrastructure provided in the BBMP,” the court said.
“Without ascertaining the economic and financial status of the owners of the sites, such an approach—adopted to collect increased amount from the owner of the larger areas only because the area is newly incorporated into the BBMP jurisdiction—cannot be termed as a reasonable exercise. It cannot be lost sight that most of these areas which are included in the BBMP were part of the villages in the outskirts and many agriculturists who owned the lands might have got converted and become the part of the newly constituted BBMP.
They will have to now shell out huge amounts towards improvement charges at higher rates because they possessed larger sets or properties. Therefore, the basis of the differential treatment lacks intelligence or reasonable criteria. Hence the different rates charged cannot be sustained”.
The court also said, “Rule 5, which provides for the collection of improvement expenses at the time of registration of the khata, is set aside only to the extent it provides for recovery of the amount at the time of the registration of the khata. Provisions made in the said rule for collecting the full sum are also declared as ultra vires under section 467 of the act.”
Different rates of improvement expenses fixed for different sites based only on the dimension of the sites are declared as arbitrary and unreasonable, the high court observed.
Cancellation of the khata effected on the ground of nonpayment of improvement charges is declared as illegal as such actions are hereby set aside in so far as it pertains to the petitioner, the court added.
“The high court’s order means the improvement charges that the BBMP used to collect at one go during the registration of the khata are termed illegal,” said KN Puttegowda, the BBMP’s advocate.
“But the corporation has the power to collect betterment fees in 20 installments as per section 467 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act.”
