Rs 3,011-cr TDR for Bangalore palace land: Govt gives a miss to ordinance route

Bengaluru: With the 45-day deadline set by the Supreme Court expiring on January 21, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) is racing against time to grant a Transferrable Development Rights (TDR) certificate — worth over Rs 3,011 crore — to the erstwhile Mysuru royal family in exchange for using 15 acres of the palace land for a road project. 

Legal experts say the state cabinet, which met last Thursday, should have passed an ordinance to temporarily override the judgment, as the Supreme Court is yet to decide on the ownership of the entire 472-acre Bangalore Palace land. 

"By not taking a clear stand, the government has acted against the interests of citizens and caused an irreparable loss to the exchequer," said a legal veteran, who has been tracking court matters regarding the palace land. "Be it in the case of Shah Bano Begum or the control over Delhi government services, there have been several instances where ordinances were promulgated to maintain the status quo for some time." 

The ordinance, the legal veteran said, would have been useful as the time to grant the TDR lapses in a day and the civil appeals relating to the constitutional validity of the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, 1996, are still pending consideration in the Supreme Court. 

The 1996 Act was considered special as it had received the rare presidential assent and was also upheld by the High Court of Karnataka. When the petitioners challenged the order, the Supreme Court had directed both parties to maintain the "status quo". 

Briefing reporters after the Cabinet meeting, Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister HK Patil said that the government had filed an interlocutory application (IA) seeking hearings on the validity of the 1996 Act. 

However, he was silent on why the IA was not filed immediately after the nine-judge Constitution bench passed the judgment in November 2024 or raised the subject during the hearing by a separate bench in the contempt case. 

As a result, the Supreme Court directed the government to grant the TDR for the disputed land in accordance with the prevailing market value of adjoining areas. "We make it abundantly clear that issuance of the TDR certificates would be subject to further orders that may be passed by this court while disposing of the appeals which are pending before the larger bench," the judgment had noted, acknowledging the ownership dispute over the palace land. 

In his note dated January 8, K Shashi Kiran Shetty, Advocate General of Karnataka, had stated that the TDR, if issued to the petitioners, is not to be processed "due to pending inter se disputes among parties". 

Patil had on record noted that the TDR compensation on a par with market value would cause a "financial strain" on the exchequer. 

On Monday, top government officials, including the advocate general, are expected to hold a high-level meeting with Supreme Court lawyers.