HC orders sanctioning of building next to SWD

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: Sanction for a building plan next to a Storm Water Drain (SWD) has been ordered to be issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) by the High Court of Karnataka.

Though rules do not allow buildings in the buffer zones of SWDs, the BBMP was unable to tell the High Court if the drain in question was formed before or after the formation of the layout.

“When it was pointedly asked as to what information is available with the respondents regarding the formation of the drain; whether the nala that is shown in the sanctioned layout plan was an already existing nala or it was formed in terms of the approved layout plan, no information is available with the respondents,” the HC said in its judgement.

Citing the Shri Pavanjeet Singh Sandhu (IPS) case, the HC said, “if the layouts are formed prior to finalization of RMP-2015, the requirement of setting apart buffer zone as contemplated in the Zonal Regulations of RMP2015 in such layouts, is not applicable.”

One Sindhu KM, owner of a residential plot in the layout formed by the Ministry of Communications Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. The site had been allotted to her father who had gifted it to her in 2022.

When she made an application for approval of sanction for a residential building, it was rejected by the BBMP. She was informed that her property abuts a tertiary drain and as per the Revised Master Plan 2015, a distance of 15 meters from the edge of the drain has to be maintained as a buffer zone and no construction is allowed.

The 15-metre buffer zone encompasses 80% of Sindhu’s site. In this background, she approached the High Court. Her petition was heard by Justice R Devdas who gave his judgment recently.

The HC said that the application for the sanction plan could not have been rejected in the absence of material information.

It said, “It has to be accepted that the layout in question was initially sanctioned in the year 1988, although a modified layout plan was subsequently sanctioned on 20.10.2012. That being the position, when no material information was available with the third respondent as to when the drain abutting the petitioner’s property was formed and whether the drain existed even prior to the formation of the layout or was subsequently formed, the third respondent could not have simply rejected the application on surmise and conjunctures.”

Allowing the petition, the HC directed the BBMP to sanction the plan on a fresh application. “The respondentBBMP authorities are directed to process the application filed by the petitioner. However, since the plan submitted by the petitioner online was rejected, the petitioner is required to submit a fresh proposal for sanction of plan online. As and when the petitioner files the application, the respondent authorities shall consider the same in the light of the orders passed by this Court.”

The HC also directed a time-bound action.

“Process the application as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks, if all other requirements of law are fulfilled by the petitioner without going into the question of buffer zone,” it said. (WP 9508/2023)