- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4090 WP No. 26566 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 26566 OF 2016 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI VIKAS S/O SURESH KUMAR MEHTA @ SURESH CHAND, AGED : 30 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS NO 908, 16TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR WARD NO 107, BANGALORE – 560010 2. SHRI RAKESH KUMAR MEHTA S/O SURESH KUMAR MEHTA @ SURESH CHAND AGED : 26 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS NO 908, 16TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR WARD NO 107 BANGALORE - 560010 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. .SHIVAKUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER B B M P, N R SQUARE, BANGALORE – 560002 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RAJAJINAGAR SUB DIVISION B B M P OFFICE 19TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND BLOCK NEAR RTO OFFICE RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4090 WP No. 26566 of 2016 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.837/2015 DATED:29.2.2016, CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENTS UNDER SECTIO 321[3] OF THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND THEREBY SET ASIDE THE CONFIRMATION ORDER DATED:14.8.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-F PASSED BY R-2, 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. A provisional order was passed on 05.08.2015 in which setback violations to the extent of 56.36% to 100% was mentioned. Despite the objections of the petitioners, an order of confirmation was passed and this order of confirmation has been affirmed in an appeal by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4090 WP No. 26566 of 2016 2. During the pendency of this writ petition, this Court directed the 2nd respondent to inspect the building in the presence of the petitioners and submit a report as to whether the constructions-in-question were in accordance with or in deviation of the sanction plan and building bye-laws. Pursuant to the said order, an affidavit is filed by the jurisdictional Executive Engineer in which it is stated that there are violations to the extent of 28% to 45%. 3. In other words, the deviation which is now mentioned in the inspection report is contrary to the earlier inspection report which led to the passing of the provisional order that was passed earlier. There is no explanation for this discrepancies. 4. In this view of the matter, in my view, it would be appropriate to direct the BBMP to initiate the proceedings afresh on the basis of the inspection report dated 13.03.2023 and pass appropriate orders - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4090 WP No. 26566 of 2016 after permitting the petitioners to file their objections. 5. If it is permissible for the petitioners to seek for regularization, they may also be permitted to do so. 6. This writ petition is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44