Relaxed rules for khatas and OCs: Road to legalising violations in Bengaluru?

Bengaluru might see relaxed rules for khatas and occupancy certificates, which will redefine the legality of properties. What are the implications?

Bengaluru: The Karnataka state Urban Development Department recently issued a notification outlining the regulations for issuing A khata certificates to properties meeting certain criteria in the Greater Bengaluru Authority limits (Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike limits) on July 25. The following are the categories of buildings and properties that would get A khata under the new regulations:

Buildings proposed on vacant sites with existing B-khatas, and buildings already constructed on unauthorised layouts/land/sites (without khata or with B-khata), excluding multi-unit flats

Unauthorised multi-unit flats/ apartments constructed on a single plot before September 30, 2024, without a BBMP khata

Unauthorised layouts converted under Section 95, Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, registered before 30.09.2024, without approvals Undivided vacant unconverted revenue land 

Unauthorised layout without land conversion, registered before September 30, 2024

For all buildings and layouts, a public road connection is mandatory; otherwise, a private road must be declared public. For flats still with the developer/owner, the land must be converted to non-agricultural use, followed by Section 17 approval under the KTCP Act, 1961. Building plan approval (Section 15, KTCP Act, 1961) and an Occupancy Certificate are required for A-khatas for each flat/unit.

For unauthorised apartments, approvals under Section 17 of the KTCP Act, 1961 (as a ‘single plot’ or layout) are required, followed by building plan approval under Section 15 of the KTCP Act, 1961, and an Occupancy Certificate (OC). If these steps are followed, an A-khata can be issued to the building. Buildings violating the KTCP Act, 1961, cannot be constructed. If the building violates zoning regulations and the Master Plan, it will be noted as such in the A-khata.

There is also a provision for B khatas here. If there is no plan approval or occupancy certificate, B-khatas may be issued if construction was completed before September 2024 (proven by a BESCOM electricity connection). Transactions registered before September 30, 2024, allow the registered owner to apply for a B-khata. Post-30.09.2024 constructions are not eligible for B-khatas. However, B-khatas do not regularise violations. Multiple owners can collectively meet the requirements for A-khatas and apply for it later.

For unauthorised layouts registered before September 2024 and vacant lands converted and unconverted, the owner must obtain the necessary approvals and conversions under the relevant acts for an A-khata; no B-khata will be issued. 

The repercussions

This move matters to a large majority of individual property owners in the city. The move simplifies legal regularisation for almost 7 lakh B‑khata properties across Bengaluru. It helps them get bank loans, civic utilities like electricity and water, and the formal documentation required for sale or development easily. 

On another level, it also removes unnecessary bureaucratic barriers for compliant property owners. For example, take the case of home loans. While nationalised banks ask for strict documentation of legalities, many housing finance firms and private banks already accord loans to B khata properties. This becomes more universal henceforth.

However, with this, citizens feel there will not be any differentiation between a property built with complete compliance with bylaws and a property built with violations.

R Rajagopalan, convener of Bengaluru Coalition, while welcoming the step, says it should involve a cost to the violator, including betterment charges and retrospective taxation, and properties should meet all the conditions. No unfair advantage should be available to those who invested in irregular sites or built illegally, he adds.

Dhananjay Padmanabhachar, founder of the Karnataka Home Buyers Forum, also says this step is a welcome step, because there is no meaning to B khata in reality. However, the occupancy certificates are essential, which form the basis of legality for all properties, he says.

Relaxing the occupancy certificate rule

However, Bengaluru might see a relaxation in rules for OC as well.

In a meeting of officials from the state Urban Development Department, BBMP, BESCOM and other departments held on July 15, officials noted that the process of issuing an Occupancy Certificate involves site inspection, comparative verification of the constructed building with the approved building plan, and other related procedures. This results in an increased workload for the officials of local bodies, leading to possible delays.

The meeting decided to consider exempting small-scale buildings from the mandatory requirement of obtaining an Occupancy Certificate, “to avoid inconvenience to the public”.

Officials opined that under the provision in Section 241(7) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024, an exemption could be granted from obtaining the Occupancy Certificate for buildings on plots not exceeding 1200 sqft in area, with ground + 2 floors or stilt + 3 floors.

This provision already exists in all other urban local body jurisdictions in the state. Officials, including the Secretary, Urban Development Department, and the Chief Commissioner of BBMP, felt it should be extended to Bengaluru.

Accordingly, the BBMP officials have been tasked with making the necessary rules. Later, the amendments would be made to the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act and the Karnataka Municipalities Act to incorporate provisions equivalent to Section 241(7) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024, after which it would be included in the Model Building Byelaws.

Citizens have objected to this step on many grounds. For example, Rajagopalan sent an objection. It says: “Any such amendment cannot be effective until, under the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act 2024, a functional Metropolitan Planning Committee is formally constituted as required by law and oversight frameworks are in place.”

It also draws attention to the Akrama Sakrama case pending in the Supreme Court, and says any such step could be seen as contempt of court.

“The arbitrary consideration of excluding 1200 sq ft properties is discriminatory at best and does not consider other factors, such as these properties do require a sanction plan and compliance, which is what the Occupancy Certificate process ensures. The proposal will remove the only check and balance to ensure they are verified as compliant and safe for occupation,” it warns.

“Such allowances will be accompanied by a lack of structural stability checks, a lack of parking space provisions, waste management capacity issues, groundwater exploitation and potential fire safety compliance issues, etc., promoting unplanned growth in the city, eroding the quality of life with potentially seismic environmental impacts. Already, in such plots that unscrupulous builders raise 7-8 floors, contrary to the law, given the rising demand for low-cost housing (for sale), rental and paying guest accommodations. The recent building fall disasters were a lesson towards ensuring stricter building bylaw enforcement. Still, the loss of lives sadly seems to have already been forgotten,” Rajagopalan says in his letter, urging the administration to withdraw the proposal from consideration.

Padmanabhachar says the BBMP is trying to shift its responsibility, which is not fair. Now the onus of ensuring the legality is on the public, and violations can increase, he feels.