Today, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a PIL by BJP leader NR Ramesh, alleging corruption in granting Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) for a garbage plant in Bengaluru. The court questioned the delay in filing and found no merit in the claims. The petition was deemed politically motivated, leading to a Rs 10,000 penalty imposed on Ramesh for misuse of public interest jurisdiction.
Karnataka: Today, on Monday, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by BJP leader and former BBMP councilor NR Ramesh, alleging corruption in the grant of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) in Bengaluru. The petition claimed that TDRs were given away at “throwaway” rates for the use of land in Kodiyala Karenahalli to set up a garbage plant. However, the Court found the petition lacked merit and questioned the lengthy delay in its filing.
The Division Bench, consisting of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind, emphasized that Ramesh did not provide any “whisper” of explanation for the delay in challenging the 2013 government order that authorized TDR grants. “In any view, the court cannot entertain the PIL after more than a decade, more particularly as it is not found to be containing any merit,” the Bench asserted.
During the proceedings, the Court also questioned whether collusion existed between the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and the petitioner. Notably, the BBMP’s counsel’s submissions appeared inconsistent with the State’s stance, raising concerns about potential collaboration between the municipal authority and Ramesh.
Representing the petitioner, counsel argued that valuable TDRs had been issued in exchange for the State’s use of land far from Bengaluru without following necessary procedures. According to the petitioner’s lawyer, even the former Advocate General had advised against such TDR grants. He clarified that the petitioner was not opposed to garbage plant construction but objected to the misallocation of TDRs, which allegedly caused losses to the State exchequer.
In defense, the State’s Additional Advocate General urged the Court to dismiss the petition, suggesting it was politically motivated, given Ramesh’s silence on this issue during his term as a BBMP councilor. The BBMP’s counsel also raised concerns about granting TDRs for land outside Bengaluru, indicating that such actions could cause future nuisance in the city.
This discrepancy in stance led Chief Justice Anjaria to question the BBMP counsel’s approach, as the municipal body’s position appeared at odds with the State government’s stance. “Why are you arguing? Your stand is contrary to the government’s stance and the 2013 circular, isn’t it?” asked the Chief Justice. The BBMP counsel eventually confirmed that they had no objections to the 2013 order, admitting that it had never been challenged by the BBMP.
In its final order, the Court dismissed the PIL with a critical note on the BBMP’s contradictory submissions, suggesting that the petition may have been “a collusive attempt to misuse the Court’s public interest jurisdiction.” As a result, the Court imposed a penalty of Rs 10,000 on Ramesh, payable to the Karnataka Legal Services Authority (KLSA).
This judgment serves as a stern reminder of the judiciary’s vigilance against misuse of PILs for political gains, especially when brought forth years after a government order with no substantial reasoning. The Karnataka High Court’s dismissal of Ramesh’s plea underlines the importance of timely and bona fide public interest petitions in India’s judicial system.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES