- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11441 WP No. 6482 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 6482 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SRI K.R JAGADISH S/O K.B RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 867/79, 4TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN ROAD, MRCR LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 040. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJITH A SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. OFFICE OF THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER (WEST) BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BASHYAM PARK, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 020. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, GOVINDARAJANAGARA DIVISION, BANGALORE - 560 040. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11441 WP No. 6482 of 2025 GOVINDARAJANAGARA DIVISION, BANGALORE - 560 040. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DTD. 25.02.2025 BEARING REFERENCE NUMBER ZC(W)/PR/26/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE R-2 CORPORATION AS PER ANNX-D. AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the order at Annexure – D which is a demolition order passed under Section 356(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020. The case of the petitioner that the order for demolition ought to have been preceded by proceedings under Section 248(1)(i)(c) of the BBMP Act, 2020, and petitioner has no notice of any of such proceedings. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order of demolition requires to be set aside as also other - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11441 WP No. 6482 of 2025 proceedings conducted under Section 248 without notice to the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents Sri Pawan Kumar submits that the notice as regards proceedings under Section 248 have been served on the security guard. 3. Taking note of the consequences that follow from order under Section 248(3), it is appropriate that the respondent – BBMP is to re-do the proceedings under Section 248 with notice to the petitioner as is permissible under law. Accordingly, the order at Annexure – D is set aside as also all proceedings under Section 248 instituted hitherto as referred to in the Demolition order are set aside, viz the Provisional Order passed under Section 248(1)(iii) and in terms of Section 248(2) of the said Act, as well as the Order of Confirmation under Section 248(3) are set aside. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11441 WP No. 6482 of 2025 4. The respondent – BBMP is at liberty to recommence proceedings under Section 248 as per settled procedure. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. 5. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16