- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6637 WP No. 4103 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 4103 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT S CHAMPAKA W/O B N MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO 3496, 14TH MAIN HAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRANGAR BENGALURU 560 008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K K VASANTH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE 560 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING (EAST) BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE EAST DIVISON 22ND FLOOR SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE BUILDING M G ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6637 WP No. 4103 of 2025 RECORDS ON THE FILE OF R-2 IN NO. SA.NE/NAYO/PURVA/P.O/22/23-24 AND SA.NE.NAYO(PU) CO/22/23-24, HEAR THE PARTIES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of confirmation that has been passed against her, in which, the provisional order which indicated deviation from the sanctioned plan is stated to have been established. The said order is also been confirmed in an appeal. 2. It is however the contention of the petitioner’s counsel that the petitioner was not served with the provisional order and, therefore, she was not permitted to file objections. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6637 WP No. 4103 of 2025 3. The order of confirmation merely indicates that the petitioner had not furnished her explanation and is silent as to whether the provisional order was served on the petitioner. 4. The Appellate Authority has also mechanically accepted the order of confirmation and has dismissed the appeal. 5. In my view, since the petitioner has not filed her objections to the provisional order and there is no finding regarding service of notice on the petitioner, it would be appropriate to set aside the order of Appellate Authority as well as the order of confirmation and permit the petitioner to file her objections within a period of two weeks from today and, on such objections being filed, the Jurisdictional Authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders afresh. 6. This petition is accordingly allowed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6637 WP No. 4103 of 2025 7. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15