If at all, there were any such hurdles, it was always open to authorities to approach this court to seek appropriate orders and an attempt made in that regard has also failed, a bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Aravind Kumar said while dealing with contempt petitions filed by Chaduranga Kanthraj Urs and others.

 

The petitioners contended that the orders passed in 2014 and 2022, including the order of March 19, 2024 were clear and explicit whereunder the respondent authorities had been directed to issue transferable development rights (TDR) as per TDR Rules in favour of the respective land owners whose land had been acquired for widening of Bellary and Jayamahal Roads in Bengaluru.

 

The petitioners claimed that respondents- Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) and Bengaluru Bruhat Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) had failed to do so and thereby they had wilfully disobeyed the directions and orders passed by the top court.

 

Court noted that the land measuring 15 acres and 39 guntas and the adjoining properties collectively measuring 456 acres belonged to the erstwhile Maharaja of Mysore. The legal heirs of deceased Maharaja of Mysore amongst others approached the court alleging wilful disobedience.

 

"The State and its authorities have no doubt dragged their feet in implementing the orders of the court. However, there seems to be thin line of doubt which has arisen in the mind of State and its authorities as regards the valuation and in this direction if steps have been taken to protect the interest of the revenue and several meetings have been held and these aspects are placed before the State Cabinet and a decision has been taken by the State cabinet, it cannot be construed or held that State is not willing to implement the order and particularly in the background of several orders having been passed though not in consonance with the orders dated 21.11.2014 and 17.05.2022," the bench said.

 

The Karnataka government authorities, on their part, said that if the compensation was required to be paid in terms of the award passed under the Act of 1996, then for the extent of 15 acres and 39 guntas the compensation payable would be Rs 37,28,813.

 

However, if the TDR certificate is to be issued as per TDR rules for the said extent of 15 acres 39 guntas, it would result in 13,91,742 sq feet additional built up area constructable in the city of Bengaluru and approximately it would be equivalent to notional value of Rs 1,396 crores after deducting 60% of the guidance value, they submitted.

 

Having examined facts of the matter, the bench said, in the instant case, after having kept quiet for a period of almost seven years, no effective steps were taken by the State and its instrumentalities to implement the orders of the court except exchange of inter-departmental correspondence.

 

"Having dragged its feet for years in implementing the orders of this court the respondents seem to have conceptualised a novel method to overreach the orders of this court and we say so for the simple reason that affidavit of the compliance does not indicate or clearly admit that the TDR certificate being issued is in accordance with the extant TDR Rules but it is on an assumed value," the bench said.

 

The court said the state government cannot now retrace its steps in this regard and determine the value of the subject property at its whims or fancies or on any imaginary value for the purposes of issuance of TDR.

 

It noted that when the value of adjacent and abutting land was fixed at Rs 2,83,500 per sq meter and 2,04,000 per sq meter respectively under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, the value of subject land could not be diminished below the said value.

The court found the stand taken by the state government of compliance thus stood rejected.

 

"The value of the land cannot be anything less than market value as already determined under Section 45B of the Karnataka Stamp Act 1957. At the cost of repetition it requires to be noticed that the state government itself has considered the market value as per guidance value at Rs 2,70,000 per sq meter fixed under Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 and has adopted 0.4 times of the said value to calculate the TDR for the reason that the Bangalore Palace falls within agricultural zone which cannot be market value under TDR Rules," the bench said.

 

The court pointed out that no material whatsoever had been placed by the State to depict that the subject land was to be construed as falling within agricultural zone.

 

"In fact, the subject property was utilised as a private residence of the then Maharaja of Mysore since long number of years and it is situated in the heart of city of Bangalore. There cannot be any cavial to the fact that TDR is required to be issued per TDR Rules," the bench said.

 

The court, however, deemed it proper to extend one final opportunity to report compliance within a time frame.

 

"Since we have opined that the State and its authorities have intentionally dragged its feet for long number of years and having attempted to tap all the mirage remedies and left with no other option and to stave off these proceedings have passed the orders... to utilise the subject land for road widening,...still an opportunity to issue TDR’s as per market value as envisaged under Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, ought to be extended to the respondents/contemnors," the bench said.

 

The court directed the respondent authorities to issue the TDR as per the value in favour of the respective claimants within six weeks.

 

On account of the faux pas situation that had been created by the respondent authorities, the court directed that each of the complainants shall be paid a sum of Rs one lakh each towards the cost of these proceedings.

 

The court fixed the matter for reporting compliance on January 22, 2015.