Owners can’t be forced to relinquish land free of cost for road widening as per master plan: Karnataka High Court

The High Court of Karnataka has held that civic authorities cannot compel private landowners to surrender a portion of their land free of cost for widening an existing road, solely on the basis of a proposal in the master plan for road widening under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (KTCP) Act, 1961, by imposing such a condition for approving a building plan.

If civic authorities require the land for road widening in public interest, the court said they must “resort to legally recognised statutory mechanisms, including acquisition proceedings under Section 69 of the KTCP Act read with the applicable land acquisition law, along with payment of due compensation, or grant of Transferable Development Rights wherever permissible under the applicable planning regulations. Free relinquishment without any form of consideration is not a legally available option.”

Demand of GBA

Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order while quashing the demand made by the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) asking a landowner to surrender a portion of his land free of cost for widening the Kanakapura Main Road from 31 metres to 45 metres under the Revised Master Plan, 2015, as a precondition for releasing an already-approved building plan.

Petitioner Shashikumar M. had questioned the civic authority’s insistence on executing a registered relinquishment deed for 380.71 square metres of his property in Thalagattapura village without payment of any compensation, contending that such a demand was “without authority of law” and violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, who owns approximately 2 acres and 4.5 guntas of residentially converted land, had sought modification of an earlier sanctioned plan to permit the construction of a residential complex comprising 148 units. After complying with all statutory requirements, paying fees exceeding ₹1.33 crore, and obtaining the necessary approvals, the modified plan was approved by the authorities on September 26, 2024. However, the civic authority withheld the release of the approved plan, demanding that the petitioner first surrender the land required for widening the Kanakapura Main Road.

No statutory obligation

Upholding the petitioner’s contentions, the court held that the statutory obligation to surrender land without compensation applies only to roads, parks, and civic amenity sites forming part of a private layout formed by a developer with the approval of the authorities. However, land earmarked for widening existing public roads under a master plan stands on an entirely different footing. It must be secured through acquisition proceedings under Section 69 of the Act, accompanied by payment of compensation or grant of Transferable Development Rights (TDR) as per the law, the court clarified.

Terming the precondition imposed by the authority as “colourable exercise of power”, the court said that “a mere designation of land in a master plan neither divests the owner of title nor creates a coercive power enabling compulsory surrender of property”.

The court also made it clear that “what cannot be done directly through lawful acquisition cannot be indirectly achieved through the exercise of regulatory leverage” by imposing a precondition for either approving a plan or releasing an already approved plan.

Incidental benefits

Meanwhile, the court rejected the civic authority’s argument that the road widening would benefit the petitioner’s development by improving access and enhancing property value. It held that incidental benefits from public infrastructure projects cannot extinguish constitutional protection over private property, and that such enhancement in value may only be a factor considered while determining compensation.