House built in 1978; BWSSB demands pro rata in 2007, owner wins case in 2023

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: Deciding on two petitions filed in 2007, the High Court of Karnataka has held that the Bang alore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) cannot collect pro-rata charges in respect of an existing building. The house was built in 1978 and the owner had put up additional construction on the existing building in 1997. In 1998, the BWSSB demanded prorata charges of Rs.41,796 from him for the additional construction.

The owner, B Venkatesh approached a civil court which refused to grant him relief by declaring that BWSSB cannot collect pro-rata. At the same time, the trial court also restrained the Board from disconnecting the water and sewerage connection to Venkatesh’s property. Venkatesh approached the High Court with an appeal in 2007. The Board also filed an appeal against the injunction.

The appeals were finally decided and judgement passed by Justice NS Sanjay Gowda on April 21, 2023. In 1995, the BWSSB had passed a resolution to collect pro rata charges from new constructions in the city. It was applied to the additional construction on Venkatesh’s building. But the HC said this could not be done.

“In my view, Venkatesh had admittedly paid the necessary charges while securing water supply and sewerage facilities in the year 1978 and since he had paid the then prevailing rates and obtained water supply and sewerage facilities, he cannot be asked to pay prorata charges afresh. Merely because he had put up an additional construction subsequently, that would not entitle the Board to invoke a provision which is basically meant for collecting prorata charges from new construction. Therefore, the reasoning of the Trial Court to deny the declaratory relief of Venkatesh cannot be sustained,” the HC said in its judgment. The BWSSB argued in the court that in an earlier judgment the HC had upheld the Board’s right to collect pro-rata charges on the basis of the Board’s resolution.

The HC however said that, “In the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the Board, the principal question decided by this Court was as to the demand for pro-rata charges could be made without statutory sanction and this Courtheld that the Board had been conferred with the power under the Act to demand pro-rata charges for the water supply and sewerage connection.”