<p>Any action taken by the state government under the Bangalore Development (Amendment) Act, 2020, will be subject to the outcome of two PIL petitions pending over the matter, the High Court of Karnataka has ruled. </p>.<p>Of these petitions, one has been filed by Vijayan Menon and four others, and the other by K B Vijay Kumar. </p>.<p>The petitioners argue that the amendment was brought with the intention of legalising and regularising illegal occupation and construction on lands owned by the BDA. On the other hand, the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2020, allows increasing the floor area ratio of buildings on payment of premium charges to the government, they said. </p>.<p>The amendment was also aimed at reintroducing the Akrama-Sakrama scheme, which has been stayed by the apex court, the petitioners contended. In all, the BDA (Amendment) Act, the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act and the KTCP amended rules notification are prima facie violative of Articles 14, 21 and 243ZE of the Constitution, the petitioners stated. </p>.<p>The government advocate sought time to file objections to the petitions, saying less than 50% of government employees have been working from office. </p>.<p>After hearing the arguments, a division bench headed by Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka gave the government time until July 2, 2021, to file objections. </p>.<p>“We make it clear that if any action is taken on the basis of the impugned provision of law, the same will be subject to the final outcome of these two petitions. Whenever any action is proposed to be taken, the parties concerned shall be informed about the pendency of these petitions by all concerned,” the court said. </p>
<p>Any action taken by the state government under the Bangalore Development (Amendment) Act, 2020, will be subject to the outcome of two PIL petitions pending over the matter, the High Court of Karnataka has ruled. </p>.<p>Of these petitions, one has been filed by Vijayan Menon and four others, and the other by K B Vijay Kumar. </p>.<p>The petitioners argue that the amendment was brought with the intention of legalising and regularising illegal occupation and construction on lands owned by the BDA. On the other hand, the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2020, allows increasing the floor area ratio of buildings on payment of premium charges to the government, they said. </p>.<p>The amendment was also aimed at reintroducing the Akrama-Sakrama scheme, which has been stayed by the apex court, the petitioners contended. In all, the BDA (Amendment) Act, the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act and the KTCP amended rules notification are prima facie violative of Articles 14, 21 and 243ZE of the Constitution, the petitioners stated. </p>.<p>The government advocate sought time to file objections to the petitions, saying less than 50% of government employees have been working from office. </p>.<p>After hearing the arguments, a division bench headed by Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka gave the government time until July 2, 2021, to file objections. </p>.<p>“We make it clear that if any action is taken on the basis of the impugned provision of law, the same will be subject to the final outcome of these two petitions. Whenever any action is proposed to be taken, the parties concerned shall be informed about the pendency of these petitions by all concerned,” the court said. </p>
