Advertisement
The Karnataka High Court has called on the state government to create clear guidelines for land and site transactions on converted lands outside sanctioned layouts. The court emphasized that Section 17(2B) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, is meant to protect buyers while ensuring planned urban growth and adequate civic infrastructure. This move follows the dismissal of a petition where the municipality refused an e-khata for a converted plot without layout approval. The court highlighted the need for a formal regulatory framework to prevent unplanned developments.
The Karnataka High Court has urged the state government to formulate a comprehensive framework to regulate transactions involving converted lands that are not part of sanctioned layouts. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, while hearing a writ petition, noted that the rising number of such transactions makes it essential for the state to introduce clear rules. He observed that without a proper scheme or regularisation mechanism under Section 17(2B) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, courts cannot direct authorities to act in ways that contradict the law. Advertisement
The court explained that the intent behind Section 17(2B) is to protect the interests of genuine buyers while maintaining planned urban growth and ensuring civic infrastructure is not compromised. It also stressed that this provision balances individual property rights with the broader public objective of orderly development.
This directive emerged during the dismissal of a petition filed by U Mamatha, who had requested the Holalkere Town Municipality to issue an e-khata for her property. She submitted her title deed, conversion order, and tax receipts, noting that a manual khata was issued in 2015 and property tax had been paid regularly. The municipality, however, cited government circulars preventing e-khatas for plots without approved layout plans. The court supported this, clarifying that although Mamatha's property was converted land, it did not fall under a sanctioned layout.
The bench reiterated that Section 17(2B) seeks to prevent unregulated layouts that could burden civic amenities and infrastructure. It also noted that authorities had previously sought government approval to collect betterment charges for regularisation, but the proposal was rejected. Justice Magadum concluded that the municipality had no legal obligation to issue an e-khata in this case, highlighting that a writ can only be issued when both a duty exists for the authority and a legal right is vested in the petitioner.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
