"East India Company mindset": Karnataka High Court slams BDA for denying TDR certificates while acquiring land for public purpose

The Karnataka High Court recently slammed the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for denying Transferble Development Rights (TDR) certificates as promised to land owners while acquiring their lands for public purpose. [Jayamma and Ors. vs State of Karnataka and Ors.].Justice Krishna S Dixit stated that given the human values on which the Indian Constitution was founded, the State and its authorities should adopt a humane approach to the problems of those in need of socio-economic aid.."A bare perusal of the impugned order gives an impression that it is texted with the mindset of a Draftsman of East India Company of the bygone era and not by the one whose heart is at the right place," the Court observed..The lands belonging to the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of road widening in Marenahalli. They were promised the issuance of TDR certificates in exchange for their lands, and accordingly, they gave up their lands and applied for the TDR certificates as per the rules. However, the BDA denied the certificates, through an order passed on March 17, 2022. This prompted the petitioners to approach the court..The counsel for the petitioners argued the order of the order of the BDA was contrary to Section 14B of Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act. He stated that the petitioners were issued individual Hakku Patras (claim letters), and that denial of TDR certificate was unsustainable when the patras were surrendered sans compensation.Further, he contended that the State could not have given a rough deal to the petitioners and that its actions fell militantly short of fairness standards expected from it..The respondents, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and BDA, contended that grant of TDR is governed by a statutory scheme and unless the conditions of the scheme are strictly complied with, there cannot be a claim for TDR certificates.Stating that the petitioners were not owners of the land, they sought dismissal of the writ petition..The Court noted that the State government had authorised BDA to issue the hakku patras and, therefore, held that the BDAs submissions were unsustainable. It said that the right to property continues to be constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A and this guarantee is not confined to the right of ownership but extends to a much larger bundle of rights wherein interest in the property short of ownership also finds place..The Court opined that BDA had not justified the denial of TDR certificate to the petitioner and said that denial of TDR would in fact mean that the petitioners are not entitled to compensation even though they had paid the land title deed.It said that it would be unscientific if the government acquires land of a private person for development projects without following the rules and denies the facility of TDR..Therefore, the Court allowed the petitions and quashed the BDA's order of March 17, 2022 that negated BBMP recommendation to issue the TDR certificates to the petitioners..It ordered the BDA to issue TDR certificates to the petitioners and directed them to submit a report to the Registrar General about the compliance of the High Court order within three months..In case of delay in complying with the court order, the BDA Commissioner was directed to pay a fine of ₹1,000 per day to the applicant. .Senior Advocate DL Jagadeesh along with advocate Leela P represented the petitioners.Additional Government Advocate Srinivasa Gowda represented the State.Advocate Chaithravati represented the BBMP.Advocate BS Sachin appeared for BDA..[Read Order]