On December 10, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the legal heirs of the Mysore Maharaja and directed the authorities to issue TDR as per the present market value within six weeks.
Credit: DH File Photo
Bengaluru: The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has estimated compensation of Rs 3,011.66 crore in the form of Transferrable Development Rights (TDR) for acquiring 15 acres and 17.5 guntas of the Bengaluru Palace land adjoining Jayamahal and Ballari roads.
The fresh calculation came after the Supreme Court directed the authorities to consider the guidance value of adjoining areas.
On December 16, BBMP Chief Commissioner Tushar Girinath wrote to Chief Secretary Shalini Rajneesh, soliciting the issuance of a revised government order expeditiously.
This is because the government, in its order dated April 24, 2014, had estimated the TDR value of the palace land at Rs 1.50 crore, based on the total compensation of Rs 11 crore fixed for the entire 472-acre palace property under the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act 1996. The erstwhile royal family of Mysore approached the Supreme Court, challenging the compensation.
On December 10, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the legal heirs of the Mysore Maharaja and directed the authorities to issue TDR as per the present market value within six weeks. This works out to Rs 2.83 lakh per square metre for the palace land adjoining Ballari Road and Rs 2.04 per square metre for the palace land adjoining Jayamahal Road.
While the erstwhile family received a favourable judgment in the contempt petition, the litigation over the ownership of the entire 472-acre palace ground is still pending before the larger bench of the top court. In light of this, the government is likely to issue TDR compensation with a rider that it can be consumed only after the apex court settles the original petition.
The recent Supreme Court judgment in the contempt petition also made it clear that the TDR issued by the competent authority would be subject to final orders that may be passed in civil appeals pending before a larger bench. This order would have no bearing on the pending appeals, the bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar had noted in the judgment.