
The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the Karnataka government not to use the Premium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scheme to regularise illegal constructions. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant issued…
The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the Karnataka government not to use the Premium Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scheme to regularise illegal constructions. A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant issued notice on a plea by the Citizens Action Forum challenging the Karnataka High Court's June judgment upholding the scheme. The court expressed deep skepticism about the state's plans, contrasting Bengaluru's infrastructure with Greater Noida's planned development.

Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi argued that road width had become the sole criterion for granting Premium FAR, overburdening Bengaluru's fragile civic infrastructure. He said the scheme resembled the controversial Akrama-Sakrama scheme used to regularise unauthorised buildings. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta refuted this, saying Akrama-Sakrama regularisation is separate and the Premium FAR scheme is capped at 0.6 of original FAR, with revenue going into a dedicated infrastructure fund.
The CJI noted no visible improvement in basic infrastructure despite additional construction. He warned that without adding roads, sewer lines and flyovers, the system would collapse under natural calamities. Justice Bagchi acknowledged Bengaluru's "traffic nightmare." The court gave Karnataka authorities four weeks to file their response.
Barandbench.com led with the court's order against regularising illegal structures and detailed the bench's skepticism, quoting the CJI on builder accountability. Times of India led with the Gurugram comparison and Greater Noida planning contrast. Barandbench gave more space to Sondhi's Akrama-Sakrama analogy, while Times of India reported Mehta's rebuttal prominently. Both quoted Mehta's assurance that the schemes are separate. The court's four-week deadline for Karnataka's response is the next concrete step.
Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral
Sources (2): barandbench.com (neutral report), timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report)
This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry.
Updated: this story now draws on 2 sources.