The Karnataka High Court has clarified that the Premium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scheme is not akin to the Akrama Sakrama scheme, dismissing a petition that challenged its validity. The petitioners had argued that the Premium FAR is manifestly arbitrary as it regularizes illegal buildings, drawing parallels to the earlier Akrama Sakrama scheme.
Court's Ruling
A division bench of the High Court, comprising Chief Justice and Justice, observed that the two schemes are fundamentally different in their objectives and implementation. The court noted that the Premium FAR scheme is a prospective policy aimed at generating revenue and promoting planned development, whereas the Akrama Sakrama scheme was a one-time regularization of unauthorized constructions.
Petitioners' Arguments
The petitioners contended that the Premium FAR scheme violates the principles of equality and is arbitrary, as it allows builders to exceed the permissible FAR by paying a premium. They argued that this effectively regularizes illegal constructions, similar to the Akrama Sakrama scheme, which was previously struck down by the court.
Government's Stand
The state government defended the scheme, stating that it is a forward-looking measure to address the growing demand for urban space and to generate resources for infrastructure development. The government emphasized that the scheme does not condone past violations but provides a legal mechanism for future development.
Implications
The ruling is expected to have significant implications for real estate development in Karnataka, as it upholds the government's authority to introduce innovative policies for urban planning. The court's decision also sets a precedent that distinguishes between regularization of past illegalities and prospective planning tools.
