Karnataka High Court Issues Notice On PIL Challenging Amendment To BDA Act To Regularize Illegal Constructions

The BDA Amendment Act seeks to inter alia, legalize the illegal occupation and construction on lands owned by the Bengaluru Development Authority.

A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty issued the notice returnable on January 28, 2021 and directed the respondent to file their statement of objections before January 25, 2021.

The petition filed by Vijayan Menon states that "The BDA Amendment Act, like the Akrama Sakrama Scheme, is prima facie violative of Articles 14, 21 and 243ZE of the Constitution of India and is also contrary to the existing provisions of the Bengaluru Development Authority Act, 1976."

Senior Advocate Harish Narasappa appearing for the petitioner submitted that:

"The state had, in 2014, sought to amend several state legislations in order to regularize and legalize several unauthorized and illegal constructions in Karnataka and the said scheme was commonly referred to as the Akrama Sakrama Scheme. Matters challenging the scheme are pending before the Supreme Court and by way of interim relief by order dated May 04, 2017 the court has stayed the implementation of the Scheme."

The plea states that "The implementation of the BDA Amendment Act would render infructuous the current challenge to the Akrama Sakrama Scheme. The BDA Amendment Act detrimentally affects the residents of Bengaluru as the said Amendment Act incentivises land grabbers to illegally occupy government lands as the said illegal occupation would later on be legalized and regularized as a result of the said Amendment Act. The KTCP Amendment Act seeks to allow an increase in the floor area ratio for buildings by mere payment of premium charges to the Government."

It is further said that "The BDA Amendment Act, prospectively penalizes jurisdictional officers for their failure to prevent unauthorised constructions/occupations on BDA land from the date of the commencement of the BDA Amendment Act. In effect, the same amounts to excusing the jurisdictional officers for failure to prevent the unauthorized constructions/occupations on BDA lands prior to the date of the commencement of the BDA Amendment Act."

It is also claimed that The BDA Amendment Act has been enacted without due public consultation and the BDA Amendment Act has been enacted without having been brought to the notice of the Bangalore Metropolitan Planning BMPC which is a constitutional body set up under Section 503-B of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 in accordance with Article 243ZE of the Constitution of India.

The plea says that if urgent interim reliefs and / or measures are not passed, it would result in irreversible damage to the urban landscape of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Area as several unauthorised constructions will be rendered legal.

The petition prays for a declaration that the BDA Amendment Act, the KTCP Amendment Act and the KTCP Amended Rules Notification as violative of Articles 14, 21 and 243ZE of the Constitution of India. It seeks to call for records from the respondents with respect to any action they may have taken in connection with the BDA Amendment Act, the KTCP Amendment Act and the KTCP Amended Rules Notification. By way of interim relief it has sought for direction to the respondents and their officials restraining them from entertaining any applications for allotment under the BDA Amendment Act or from entertaining any applications for grant of permission for utilization of premium floor area ratio during the pendency of the petition.

Click Here To Download Judgment

[Read Judgment]