BMP for ceiling on commercialisation

BMP for ceiling on commercialisation
The Hindu
Civic body had issued notices to several residents of Sadashivanagar

BANGALORE: The hearing of the Sadashivanagar violations before the Karnataka High Court took a new turn when the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) said that the time had come to ensure that only a certain percentage of buildings in a residential area are permitted to convert to commercial category.

Making these submissions, BMP counsel Ashok Harnahalli said he agreed with the view that indiscriminate change from residential to commercial should not be permitted and that the character of a locality should be maintained.

The court was dealing with the Sadashivanagar violations in which the BMP had issued notices to hundreds of residents of Sadashivanagar calling upon them to explain the illegal change in land use and violation of other building norms. Scores of landlords, tenants, business and commercial establishments, including banks, ATM counters, nursing homes, offices of advocates and software companies had challenged the BMP notices, saying that they are illegal and not in accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act. Senior counsel Narayan took objection to the manner in which the notices were issued without affording a hearing to the owners/landlords.

Moreover, the issue of notices were affecting the people running or operating their businesses as they did not know for how long they could continue. The BMP said any change in land use could be permitted only by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) and not by it. Moreover, the sanction of plan for a residential, commercial and high rise buildings differed and a residential building could not be arbitrarily used for commercial or business purposes.

It said the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) specified the nature of a locality and it could not be changed. Justice Rammohan Reddy, who has been hearing the case, observed that the orders would have to be redone if the law mandated the BMP to give personal hearing to the landlords/tenants in Sadshivanagar.

He asked the BMP to examine whether it could permit large-scale change in land use in a residential locality.

When told it was the BDA that permitted change in land use, he directed it to be impleaded as a party and adjourned hearing of the case to Thursday.