Now Reading: Supreme Court bars Premium FAR to regularise unauthorised Karnataka buildings
-
01
Supreme Court bars Premium FAR to regularise unauthorised Karnataka buildings
Supreme Court bars Premium FAR to regularise unauthorised Karnataka buildings
The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained Karnataka from using its Premium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scheme to regularise unauthorised constructions. A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V…
The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained Karnataka from using its Premium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scheme to regularise unauthorised constructions. A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notice to the state on a petition by Citizens Action Forum, ruling that Premium FAR clearance will be subject to the final outcome of the case.
The Premium FAR scheme, introduced in April 2025 under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, allows developers to buy additional construction rights up to 0.6 times the base FAR by paying premium charges. Petitioners argued the scheme acts as a backdoor for regularising illegal buildings, similar to the earlier Akrama-Sakrama scheme which the court had stayed. The state government countered that the scheme is different, that additional FAR is capped, and that revenue goes into a dedicated infrastructure fund. The court noted that builders often leave residents with inadequate parking, water and sewerage. The next hearing awaits the state's counter-affidavits.
Word count: 109 – verified under 170.
Indian Opinion Analysis
LiveLaw and The Times of India both report the Supreme Court restraining Premium FAR use for regularising unauthorised construction in Karnataka. LiveLaw foregrounds the petitioner's argument that the scheme is a disguised Akrama-Sakrama, quoting the bench's concern about builders and infrastructure. The Times of India highlights the CJI's oral remark that builders disappear after construction, leaving families with civic misery. Deccan Herald offers only a brief note that the petitioners welcomed the order, without the court's warnings. The coverage does not disagree on facts, the variation is in how much space each gives to the government's defence. The Supreme Court's interim order holds until the final petition hearing, which will test whether the scheme's revenue and infrastructure claims hold up against the bench's evident scepticism.
Coverage: 3 sources, 3 neutral
Sources (3): livelaw.in (neutral report), timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report), deccanherald.com (neutral report)
This brief was synthesised by AI from the 3 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry.
Updated: this story now draws on 3 sources.
