NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday questioned the Karnataka govt’s decision to allow for construction purposes Premium Floor Area Ratio (PFAR) — which is FAR over and above the mandated FAR — saying it could lead to construction of multistoried buildings on many narrow 9-metre-wide roads in Bengaluru, worsening the already strained civic amenities in the burgeoning tech-city.A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “The permission for PFAR would allow many multistoried buildings to come up on narrow roads. The builders will sell a dream to the flat buyers. But what happens to the civic amenities? Providing increased FAR at a cost in a newly developed area may be alright. But such permission in old residential areas would strain civic amenities. What will happen to the residential areas where roads are narrow?”The bench said, “The state must think about the interests of the residents and not to benefit the realtors and builders. Should the residents come on the street to protest every time to seek protection of their rights? Should govt not think of how much congestion it would cause?”End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos‘Really Happy For Others’: SC Rejects Umar Khalid’S Bail; Partner Shares His Reaction“Trump’s Interest Is Clear”: Ex-Diplomat Slams Venezuela ActionCPI-M Protests Near Us Consulate In Chennai Over Venezuela AttackBJP Welcomes SC Denial Of Bail To Umar Khalid And Sharjeel Imam; Opposition Calls It Unfortunate”US Has No Jurisdiction in Venezuela” Ex-UN Envoy Dilip Sinha Slams US Action In VenezuelaAfter T20 World Cup Move, Bangladesh Now Bans IPL 2026 Broadcast Amid Mustafizur Rahman RowSC Rejects Bail Plea Of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam; Grants Bail To 5 Others In Delhi Riots CaseRajnath Singh Commissions ICG’s Pollution Control Vessel ‘Samudra Pratap’, Hails Make-In-IndiaShashi Tharoor, Manish Tewari & Salman Khurshid Raise Concerns Over US Attack In Venezuela’Whole Of Jammu And Kashmir Should Be Reunited With India’: British MP Bob Blackman123PhotostoriesBirthday special: Best songs of Diljit DosanjhAR Rahman birthday special: From ‘Chaiyya Chaiyya’ to ‘Chaka Chak’ — his best Bollywood songs5 powerful money lessons from Morgan Housel’s bestselling book ‘The Psychology of Money’Chef Sanjeev Kapoor shares comforting flavours of Gujarat that are worth trying this winterDeepika Padukone birthday special: From Denmark roots to Bollywood stardom4 foods that may help slow down ageingHeart health: The big 3 heart numbers to know, as per Harvard experts7 legendary Indian scientists and their contributionsHow to make Paneer Bread Pakoda for evening snacking5 foods that steadily cause hair loss without you knowing about it123Hot PicksUS strikes VenezuelaVande Bharat Sleeper TrainPublic holidays January 2026Gold rate todayUmar Khalid BailCigarette tax hikeBank Holidays JanuaryTop TrendingSan Francisco 49ersCardi BQuinn HughesKyle TuckerSidney Crosby LifestyleTyrese Haliburton and Jade Jones Net WorthKevin StefanskiChicago Bulls vs Boston CelticsJohn PyleKevin Durant vs LeBron James Net Worth
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday questioned the Karnataka govt’s decision to allow for construction purposes Premium Floor Area Ratio (PFAR) — which is FAR over and above the mandated FAR — saying it could lead to construction of multistoried buildings on many narrow 9-metre-wide roads in Bengaluru, worsening the already strained civic amenities in the burgeoning tech-city.A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “The permission for PFAR would allow many multistoried buildings to come up on narrow roads. The builders will sell a dream to the flat buyers. But what happens to the civic amenities? Providing increased FAR at a cost in a newly developed area may be alright. But such permission in old residential areas would strain civic amenities. What will happen to the residential areas where roads are narrow?”The bench said, “The state must think about the interests of the residents and not to benefit the realtors and builders. Should the residents come on the street to protest every time to seek protection of their rights? Should govt not think of how much congestion it would cause?”
