Latest news with #GreaterBengaluruGovernanceAct
Hindustan Times
12 hours ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
What Karnataka's move to exempt small plots from Occupancy Certificates means for Bengaluru's real estate market
In a move that could reshape building compliance norms across Karnataka, the state's Urban Development Department (UDD) has proposed exempting residential buildings constructed on plots measuring up to 1,200 square feet from the mandatory requirement of obtaining Occupancy Certificates (OCs). In a move that could reshape building compliance norms across Karnataka, the state's Urban Development Department (UDD) has proposed exempting residential buildings constructed on plots measuring up to 1,200 square feet from the mandatory requirement of obtaining OCs. (Representational Image)(Souptik Datta ) "Buildings up to ground + 2 floors or stilt + 3 floors on plots exceeding 1200 sq ft may be exempted from obtaining occupancy certificate (OC)," the proposal signed by Tushar Giri Nath, additional chief secretary at UDD and accessed by showed. The meeting, chaired by Giri Nath, recommended amendments to key legislations, including the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024, the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, and the model building regulations under the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department. The proposal to waive OCs for buildings under 1,200 sq ft has sparked a mix of relief and concern among builders, homeowners, and urban planners. While the exemption could ease regulatory burdens on thousands of small property owners, especially in Bengaluru's dense and unplanned neighbourhood, experts fear it may open the floodgates to unsafe, unregulated construction and further strain the city's fragile infrastructure. Also Read: Karnataka Cabinet approves regularisation of B-Khata properties in Bengaluru. Here's what it means for property owners What the proposed exemption means Occupancy Certificates are currently required to ensure a completed building adheres to approved plans, municipal by-laws, and safety norms. Without an OC, a property is technically unfit for occupation and is ineligible for utilities such as water and electricity from government agencies. However, many smaller buildings in Bengaluru and other urban areas are constructed informally, often without OCs, Dhananjaya Padmanabhachar, director of the Karnataka Home Buyers Forum, pointed out. If approved, the exemption would essentially legalise properties, at least those on plots under 1,200 sq ft, offering relief to homeowners who struggle with compliance or whose builders failed to secure the necessary approvals. The move could also reduce red tape for first-time homebuyers or those constructing budget homes, experts say. Also Read: Good news for tenants: Rents may stabilise in 2025 as new supply and infra improve connectivity to peripheral locations Bengaluru needs better real estate regulation, say experts 'If you go to any locality in Bengaluru today, you will find that most buildings have some form of violation; they've deviated from the sanctioned plan in one way or another,' said Padmanabhachar, an expert familiar with the matter. 'As per the Supreme Court's directives, it is the responsibility of the city corporation to regulate and take action against such violations. But under the new amendment, individuals will be allowed to construct on plots below 1,200 sq ft without an occupancy certificate, and the corporation will no longer be held accountable for any deviations.' He cautioned that this could open the door to widespread misuse. 'Instead of enforcing stricter zoning regulations and ensuring planned development, this move may actually encourage more illegal constructions,' he said, pointing out that builders may exploit the exemption to erect ground-plus-two floor structures without adhering to any formal approval norms. 'This move will almost certainly lead to a rise in illegal constructions,' said Vittal BR, an advocate at the Karnataka High Court. 'People will get one sanctioned plan on paper and construct something entirely different in reality, knowing that no occupancy certificate will be required to validate it later.' He said that the exemption could trigger a rush of new construction in smaller plots across the city. 'More and more people will start building on small sites because there's no OC needed. It becomes extremely difficult for authorities to monitor or control these developments, especially when deviations from the approved plan go unchecked. In the long run, it might impact the city's planning and safety standards.'
Hans India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
HC issues notice to govt over Greater Bengaluru Authority Act
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has issued a notice to the state government and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the constitutionality of the newly implemented Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024, which proposes the formation of the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA). The PIL was filed by noted filmmaker T.S. Nagabharana and others. The matter was heard on Monday by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Joshi. After hearing preliminary arguments, the court directed the state and the BBMP to file their objections within four weeks. Senior advocate M.B. Nargund, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the Act violates the 74th Constitutional Amendment, which was enacted to strengthen local self-governance through urban local bodies. He contended that the state government is undermining the constitutional mandate by attempting to centralize control over municipal administration, effectively bypassing elected representatives. The petitioners have also requested the court to direct the government to conduct BBMP elections within three months. The petition expresses concern that under the new GBA structure, elected municipal representatives will be sidelined, with legislative and executive powers being extended to Members of Parliament and Members of the Legislative Assembly. It claims that municipal plans and decisions will now require GBA approval, thereby reducing the autonomy of the BBMP and weakening the role of locally elected leaders. Additionally, the PIL criticizes the lack of criteria ensuring that GBA members are local residents or elected representatives. It argues that this could lead to a disconnect between decision-makers and local communities, undermining accountability and citizen representation in urban governance. The petition also warns against dividing Bengaluru into multiple administrative zones under the GBA without conducting a scientific urban study. It points out that similar attempts in other cities have led to administrative failures and that issues such as population imbalance and social disparity could emerge. The move to appoint a Chief Commissioner over the entire GBA, while placing elected mayors and councillors under their authority, is seen as a blow to the democratic structure of urban governance. The High Court will take up the matter further once the state and BBMP submit their responses.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
High court orders notice to Karnataka government on Greater Bengaluru validity
Bengaluru: The high court on Monday ordered issuance of notice to the state govt, BBMP, and State Election Commission on a PIL petition challenging the constitutional validity of Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bhakru and Justice CM Joshi directed the respondents to submit responses by the next date of hearing. Appearing for petitioners, senior advocate MB Nargund submitted that elections to BBMP were last held in August 2015. According to him, the Greater Bengaluru Governance Authority violates the 74th amendment to the Constitution on strengthening municipal bodies. The petitioners cited the Supreme Court's decision in the Kishan Singh Tomar case, where it specified that State Election Commissions are required to conduct time-bound polls. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru The PIL was jointly filed by film director TS Nagabharana, former BBMP corporator G Manjunatha Raju and GS Renuka Prasad, chairman of Shanthinagar Residents' Welfare Association. The Greater Bengaluru Authority, created through an Act, is an apparatus which will enable the state govt "to intrude into" the local govt's administration and functioning "without holding elections", the petitioners said, in a reference to the non-conduct of elections to the BBMP for the past five years. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like ACE Nest: Book with ₹5 Lacs – Studio & 1 BHK Near YEIDA Ace Noida Book Now Undo The petitioners contended that the authority's establishment is unconstitutional as its functions are almost the same as a municipality's. "Further, Section 15 of the Act confers the responsibility of formulation and execution of major projects, and for that purpose, it can even borrow money as per Section 23 of the Act," the petitioners said. The petitioners stated that the Greater Bengaluru Authority is not a municipality or municipal corporation as per Article 243Q of the Constitution of India. Hence, this takes away the principle of decentralisation as enshrined in the constitutional amendment. "Under the Constitution, the Metropolitan Planning Committee will prepare a draft development plan for the metropolitan area and forward the plan to the state govt. As the CM himself is the head of Greater Bengaluru Authority and the Authority is responsible for planning, the separation of roles is completely removed by the Act," the petitioners said.
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Another petition in Karnataka HC challenges legality of Greater Bengaluru Governance Act
In the second such petition before the Karnataka High Court, a group of Bengaluru residents, including filmmaker T S Nagabharana, on Monday challenged the legality of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, as per which the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) will be reorganised into five corporations – central, east, north, south, and west. A bench consisting of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi issued a notice for the state to respond to the petition, which prays for several provisions of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act to be declared ultra vires to the 74th amendment of the Constitution. The 74th amendment primarily deals with the powers and finances of municipal bodies. In the interim, the petition also calls for the operation of the legislation to be stayed and for the BBMP elections to be held within three months. The petitioners argued that this was an attempt by the state to take over local bodies despite the absence of elections. The Citizens Action Forum has also moved the high court in the matter, arguing that sections of the Act encourage the centralisation of powers in the hands of the State Government at the expense of local self-governance 'in the garb of the Greater Bengaluru Authority and Assembly Constituency-level Consultative and Coordination Committee'. Among many other issues, the Citizens Action Forum's petition raises the concern of elected members becoming a minority. 'The only members elected at the municipal level would be the Mayors of the City Corporations who would in any case not be more than 7 in number. The elected members of the municipal government who form a part of the GBA would therefore be a numerical minority….. It is also pertinent to note that even the members of State Government and non-elected parastatal heads and bureaucrats have been given voting rights in the GBA. Therefore, the elected municipal leaders would form a minority proportion in votes held by the GBA,' the petition reads. Each of the five new corporations will have Assembly constituencies and wards within them, as per a draft notification.
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
GBA ploy to take control of city admin: Karnataka HC plea
BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court issued notice to the state government, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and the State Election Commission on a public interest litigation filed by film director T S Nagabharana and two others questioning the legality of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act (GBA), 2024. Stating that the Act is arbitrary and ultra vires the scope and ambit of the Constitution, the petitioners also sought directions to conduct the election to the BBMP. A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi issued notice after hearing the petition which sought a stay on the operation of the GBA, notified on May 14, 2025, and also direction to the SEC to conduct the BBMP elections within three months. The petitioners urged the court to declare Sections 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 316 as unconstitutional and consequently declare the GBA as unconstitutional, arbitrary and ultra vires the scope and ambit of the Constitution.
