BDA, BBMP slug it out on development

The dispute began last year and taking into consideration the growing differences between the BBMP and the BDA, Principal Secretary to the Urban Development Department K Jyothiramalingam had a meeting last July. The disputes ran over who should sanction the building plans, issue the No Objection Certificates (NOCs) and the Occupancy Certificates (OCs). Differences cropped up over who should pocket the depository amount for obtaining all the certificates.

Certain parameters were fixed by the Urban Development Department in the meeting, suggesting that the BBMP should give clearance to those building projects, coming under the BBMP limits, whereas in the areas other than the BBMP limits, BDA will be the sanctioning authority for all the building projects.

The BBMP’s contention is that despite the clear guidelines, the BDA allegedly gave the Occupancy Certificate to some of the buildings, which were within the BBMP area. One such property was at Bommanahalli in Kottanur village. These actions of the BDA have reportedly incurred a loss of Rs 18.7 crore to the BBMP.

Annoyed with the BDA’s actions and subsequent loss of revenue to the Palike, BBMP Commissioner Dr S Subramanya shot off a letter to the BDA commissioner saying that the engineering section member  Ramaswamy and engineer with the planning department of the BDA Rangesh had inspected the property and gave the occupancy certificate. He said, “Prima facie this appears to be an unauthorised transaction. Hence, these two officers should be suspended.”

When contacted, the BDA top officials said the clearance was given two years back when the BDA was the sanctioning authority but not the BBMP. They said Ramaswamy had retired around two years back while Rangesh is serving in Dharwad district. “There appears to be some confusion in the BBMP. We will soon clear their doubts,” said a BDA official.