M/s. Mantri Developers Private Limited vs Bangalore Development Authority

Ashok B. Hinchigeri

The petitioner, who is a developer has raised the challenge to the respondent''s endorsement, dated 6.7.2009 (Annexure-D) turning down the petitioner''s request for handing over to the petitioner the civic amenity area in Survey No.7/P, 9/P and 13/P of Gubbalala village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk and for a direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondent to consider the petitioner''s representation, dated 22.8.2011 (Annexure-F).

Sri Srinivas Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is giving up the challenge to the impugned endorsement at Annexure-D. He submits that the petitioner would be content, if a direction is given to the respondent to consider the petitioner''s representation, dated 22.8.2011 (Annexure-F) in terms of this Court''s order, dated 13.7.2011 passed in W.P. No. 12689/2011.

Sri M.S. Chandrashekar Babu, the learned counsel for the respondent has raised the threshold bar to the very maintainability of this writ petition. He submits that the petitioner has no locus-standi to file this writ petition. As per Regulation No.7.1 of the Master Plan (Revision Master Plan, 2015), it is only the local residents'' association which can make the request, which the petitioner has made now. As the local residents'' association is not the petitioner or a co-petitioner, this petition is liable to be rejected on the short ground of the locus-standi and of the non-joinder of the necessary parties.

To appreciate the contentions urged on behalf of the parties, it is necessary to advert to Regulation No.7.1 of the Revised Master Plan, 2015. It reads as follows:

7.1 Regulations for Residential Development Plan:

10% of the lend shall be reserved for Park and Open space. The open space (park) shall be relinquished to the authority free of cost and the same may be allowed to be maintained by the local residents association (registered), if the Authority so desires.

A minimum 5% of total plot area shall be provided for Civil amenities and the owner or developer shall develop such civic amenities which finally shall be handed over to the local residents association for maintenance. The mode of such handing over shall be decided by the authority.

FAR is calculated on the total land area after deducting Civic amenity site.

Parking area requirements shall be as applicable vide Table No: 23

Roads as shown in the Revised Master Plan 2015 shall be incorporated within Plan and shall be handed over to the authority free of cost.

The perusal of the Regulation No.7.1 shows that 10% of the land has to be reserved for park and open space and that the same has to be relinquished to the respondent free of cost. This has taken place in the instant case. As per the said Regulation, the respondent may allow the local residents association to maintain the same.

Sub-regulation 2 of Regulation 7 casts the duty on the developer to develop 5% of the total plot area for the civic amenity area. Thereafter, it shall be handed over to the local residents'' association for maintenance. How it is to be handed over has to be decided by the respondent. My perusal of the order, dated 13.7.2011 passed by this Court In W.P. No. 12689/2011 reveals that a direction came to be given to the respondent to consider the representation of another developer, as his representation itself was to permit the developer to develop the civic amenity area. If the petitioner makes similar representation for developing the civic amenity area, the respondent is directed to consider the same in accordance with law.

As far as handing over the civic amenity area is concerned, it is made clear that it is only the local residents'' association (Regd.), which can seek the handing over of the civic amenity area. If the local residents'' association (Regd.) makes a representation in this regard, the same shall be considered by the respondent in accordance with law.

This petition in accordingly disposed of No order as to costs.