<p>The Karnataka High Court has said that merely because the provisional Revised Master Plan (RMP) 2031 was withdrawn, it would not negate all actions taken in pursuance thereto.</p>.<p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj mentioned this while allowing the petition filed by the owner of the land and a developer.</p>.<p>Petitioners Bhavani Yallappa Palyagar (landowner) and Maarq Spaces Private Limited (developer) had entered into a joint development agreement to develop 1.24 acres of land at Doddakannahalli in Varthur hobli. The BBMP had sanctioned a building plan in January 2018 in favour of the petitioners.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read |<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/indian-realty-growth-will-come-from-tier-ii/iii-towns-nar-president-shiva-kumar-cr-1214739.html" target="_blank"> Indian realty growth will come from Tier II/III towns: NAR President Shiva Kumar CR</a></strong><br /> </p>.<p>The petitioners had applied for and obtained consent for operation from the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), besides securing an electricity connection from Bescom.</p>.<p>On May 26, 2022, the petitioners applied for issuance of an occupancy certificate. However, the BBMP refused to grant a certificate stating that the provisional RMP-2031 was withdrawn on June 20, 2022.</p>.<p>According to the BBMP, since the provisional RMP-2031 was withdrawn by the state government on June 20, 2022, there is no option but to consider the application for occupancy certificate in terms of RMP-2015 only. </p>.<p>The joint director (Town Planning-North), BBMP, claimed that there was a proposed road, measuring 18 meters going through the property of the petitioners in terms of RMP-2015 and refused to grant the occupancy certificate. It was also alleged that the petitioners encroached upon the said proposed RMP road and that they could not have put up construction over the said land.</p>.<p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that rejection of the petitioners' application for occupancy certificate is bad on two counts.</p>.<p>Firstly, the court said, the provisional Master Plan 2031 was still in force when the petitioner filed the application on May 26, 2022.</p>.<p>“Secondly, the BBMP having issued the plan sanction, commencement certificate the petitioners having acted on the plan sanctioned and put up construction by investing its monies. The petitioners cannot be deprived of the usufructs of the same merely on account of the state government withdrawing RMP-2031 when all the authorities have proceeded with on the basis of the provisional Master Plan 2031 by issuing a plan sanction and commencement certificate. There is no allegation against the petitioners as regards having constructed illegally, without a plan sanction or having deviated from the plan sanctioned,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court directed the BBMP to process the application and grant the same before May 31, 2023, if construction has been put up in accordance with the sanctioned plan and also after examining all applicable rules.</p>
<p>The Karnataka High Court has said that merely because the provisional Revised Master Plan (RMP) 2031 was withdrawn, it would not negate all actions taken in pursuance thereto.</p>.<p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj mentioned this while allowing the petition filed by the owner of the land and a developer.</p>.<p>Petitioners Bhavani Yallappa Palyagar (landowner) and Maarq Spaces Private Limited (developer) had entered into a joint development agreement to develop 1.24 acres of land at Doddakannahalli in Varthur hobli. The BBMP had sanctioned a building plan in January 2018 in favour of the petitioners.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read |<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/indian-realty-growth-will-come-from-tier-ii/iii-towns-nar-president-shiva-kumar-cr-1214739.html" target="_blank"> Indian realty growth will come from Tier II/III towns: NAR President Shiva Kumar CR</a></strong><br /> </p>.<p>The petitioners had applied for and obtained consent for operation from the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), besides securing an electricity connection from Bescom.</p>.<p>On May 26, 2022, the petitioners applied for issuance of an occupancy certificate. However, the BBMP refused to grant a certificate stating that the provisional RMP-2031 was withdrawn on June 20, 2022.</p>.<p>According to the BBMP, since the provisional RMP-2031 was withdrawn by the state government on June 20, 2022, there is no option but to consider the application for occupancy certificate in terms of RMP-2015 only. </p>.<p>The joint director (Town Planning-North), BBMP, claimed that there was a proposed road, measuring 18 meters going through the property of the petitioners in terms of RMP-2015 and refused to grant the occupancy certificate. It was also alleged that the petitioners encroached upon the said proposed RMP road and that they could not have put up construction over the said land.</p>.<p>Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that rejection of the petitioners' application for occupancy certificate is bad on two counts.</p>.<p>Firstly, the court said, the provisional Master Plan 2031 was still in force when the petitioner filed the application on May 26, 2022.</p>.<p>“Secondly, the BBMP having issued the plan sanction, commencement certificate the petitioners having acted on the plan sanctioned and put up construction by investing its monies. The petitioners cannot be deprived of the usufructs of the same merely on account of the state government withdrawing RMP-2031 when all the authorities have proceeded with on the basis of the provisional Master Plan 2031 by issuing a plan sanction and commencement certificate. There is no allegation against the petitioners as regards having constructed illegally, without a plan sanction or having deviated from the plan sanctioned,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court directed the BBMP to process the application and grant the same before May 31, 2023, if construction has been put up in accordance with the sanctioned plan and also after examining all applicable rules.</p>
