The Supreme Court adjudicated a series of contempt petitions alleging deliberate non-compliance with its orders dated 21.11.2014, 17.05.2022, and 19.03.2024 regarding the issuance of Transferable Development Rights (TDR) to landowners for properties acquired for road widening in Bengaluru. The Court examined whether the non-compliance was willful and deliberate, emphasizing adherence to the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, and associated TDR rules. The Court directed compliance, highlighting that judicial dignity must be upheld and delays without bona fide justification can amount to contempt.

1. Background and Context

The case involves contempt petitions against the State of Karnataka and associated authorities for non-compliance with Supreme Court orders concerning the issuance of TDR for lands acquired for widening Bellary and Jayamahal Roads in Bengaluru.

2. Allegations of Non-compliance

Petitioners alleged that despite clear directives, authorities delayed issuing TDR, citing financial hardship and procedural ambiguities, which were deemed untenable by the Court.

3. Judicial Directives

The Court's orders required authorities to issue TDR in accordance with the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Benefit of Development Rights) Rules, 2016, based on the market value determined under Section 45B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.

4. Authorities' Actions and Defenses

Authorities delayed implementation, filing modification applications citing financial burden. However, such applications were rejected, reinforcing the original directive.

5. Court’s Analysis and Findings

The Court found that delays were intentional, as evidenced by prolonged inaction and contradictory positions by the authorities. It stressed the importance of adhering to the guidance value for determining market rates for TDR issuance.

6. Final Directives

The Supreme Court granted a final opportunity for compliance within six weeks, mandating TDR issuance based on the market value under the Karnataka Stamp Act. Non-compliance would lead to strict consequences for contempt.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961
   • Governs land acquisition and development rights.
2. Karnataka Town and Country Planning (Benefit of Development Rights) Rules, 2016
   • Specifies the issuance and valuation of TDR.
3. Section 45B, Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957
   • Guides the determination of market value for property transactions.
4. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
   • Defines and penalizes willful disobedience of court orders.

Ratio Decidendi:

The judgment reiterated that non-compliance with judicial orders undermines the dignity of the Court. Authorities must follow the letter and spirit of the law without resorting to delay tactics. Financial hardship or procedural ambiguities cannot excuse non-compliance when the directives are clear and unambiguous.

Subjects:

Contempt of Court, Urban Development, Transferable Development Rights (TDR)
Contempt Jurisdiction, Judicial Compliance, TDR Rules, Urban Land Development, Supreme Court of India, Karnataka Stamp Act.