Karnataka govt excludes stilt floors from building height calculation to promote in-premise parking
Bengaluru: In a bid to promote parking within private premises, the Karnataka government has issued a significant amendment to its building regulations, excluding stilt floors used for parking from the overall calculation of a building’s height.
As per a recent government notification, cited by Deccan Herald on Monday, the maximum permissible height for stilt floors has been capped at 3 metres, replacing an earlier proposal of 4.5 metres. The initial draft was revised following public feedback over concerns of potential misuse for commercial purposes.
Previously, the permissible stilt floor height was limited to 2.4 metres—considered insufficient by many, particularly due to frequent damage by vehicles to water and sanitary pipelines affixed to the ceilings. The new rules apply to properties falling within the jurisdiction of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), and are part of a broader set of revisions related to building height, stilt floor usage, and setback norms.
One of the key takeaways from the notification is that the stilt floor (measured from floor to floor) will now be excluded from the building’s height limit, allowing developers to construct stilt (ground) plus four floors, while still adhering to the existing 15-metre cap on building height.
Advocate Suhas Ananth Rajkumar flagged a possible inconsistency in the regulation. “One clause caps the building height at 15 metres, while another excludes the stilt floor from this calculation. This could be interpreted as permitting stilt plus five floors, resulting in a total height of up to 18 metres. If this isn’t the government’s intention, it must issue a clarification," DH quoted him as saying.
To prevent misuse, particularly in a city like Bengaluru where enforcement remains a challenge, the notification has prescribed compliance conditions: stilt floors must be used solely for parking. In cases of violations, civic authorities have been empowered to deny water and electricity connections to residential buildings and revoke trade licenses for establishments.
Speaking on the rationale behind the decision, Tushar Girinath, Additional Chief Secretary of the Urban Development Department, said the changes are designed to discourage parking of vehicles on roads. "We have exempted the stilt floor from total height calculation to make it attractive for the property owners to create parking space within his or her compound. The earlier proposal for a 4.5-metre stilt was dropped as many raised concerns about potential misuse,” DH quoted Girinath as saying.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
