- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6349 WP No. 1526 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 1526 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT MAMATHA PRASAD WIFE OF J.VENKATESHWARA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT 129, BULL TEMPLE ROAD, OPP UMA TALIKES BUS STOP, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE, PINCODE 560018 2. SRI.J.VENKATESHWARA PRASAD, SON OF J.VENKATAKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT 129, BULL TEMPLE ROAD, OPP UMA TALIKES BUS STOP, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE, PINCODE 560018 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PUNITH C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND MUNICIPALITY AFFAIRS, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BBMP, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU 560 002 3. THE ADTP (SOUTH) BBMP OFFICE BUILDING, 9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND BLOCK, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6349 WP No. 1526 of 2025 JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE 560011 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI.V, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. PAWAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED CONFIRMATION ORDER DATED 23/08/2024 VIDE SA.NO.NA.YA(DA)/CO/119/2024-25 PASSED BY THE R3 AS PER ANNEXURE-B, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed challenging an order of confirmation on the ground that the copy of the provisional order itself was not furnished to the petitioners. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that even according to the respondents, they have pasted the provisional order on the premises and they have not made any attempt to serve the same on the petitioners. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6349 WP No. 1526 of 2025 3. In my view, though there is an alternative remedy of filing an appeal, since it is apparent that copy of the provisional order was not furnished to the petitioners, it would be appropriate to quash the confirmatory order and permit the petitioners to file their objections to the provisional order within two weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. 4. On such objections being filed, the jurisdictional authority shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioners. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 83