- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14940 WP No. 10784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 10784 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SRI. MALAY DAS S/O AJIT DAS, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2, MUNISWAMAY LANE, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, THIGALARAPET, BENGALURU - 560 002. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SARASWATHI M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP) N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE - 560 002. 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER EAST ZONE, BBMP PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING MG ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14940 WP No. 10784 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (1) QUASHING/ SETTING ASIDE THE PROVISIONAL ORDER DATED 05.03.2025 BEARING NO.ZC/E/PO/PR/123/24-25 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 UNDER SECTION 248(1) AND (2) OF THE BBMP ACT, 2020, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-E 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. Petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order passed under Section 248(3) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short 'the Act'), whereby the provisional order has been confirmed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent - BBMP submits that as against the order at Annexure-F, appellate remedy under Section 253 of the Act is available. 3. Taking note that as against the order under Section 248(3) of the Act, there is appellate remedy under Section 253 of the Act, it would be appropriate to relegate the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14940 WP No. 10784 of 2025 4. In the interregnum, there would be stay of the order under Section 248(3) of the Act and proceedings pursuant thereto, till application for stay in the appeal to be filed by the petitioner is considered by the appellate authority. Needless to state that the petitioner is required to file the appeal within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In the event the appeal is filed within such time, the benefit of stay of the order under Section 248(3) of the Act would enure to the petitioner. The appeal if filed within 2 weeks as ordered, to be taken up without raising any objections regarding delay. Noticing the violation in Column-7 of the order under Section 248(1) of the Act, petitioner not to put up any further construction on 4th and 5th / Terrace floor and may seek permission from the respondent - BBMP to put up further construction and it is left to the respondent - BBMP to take a decision as regards such aspect. All contentions are kept open. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14940 WP No. 10784 of 2025 5. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3