- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17188 WP No. 12349 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 12349 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: M/S. CHAITRA ALPINE RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, CHAITRA ALPINE APARTMENTS, 1 CROSS RIGHT, ALFA GARDENS, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, AYYAPPANAGAR, KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. MIKKILINENI DM PRASAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHARGAV G, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHIEF COMMISSIONER, BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N. R. SQUARE, BENGALURU, BENGALURU - 560 002. 2. ZONAL COMMISSIONER, HOODI SUB-DIVISION, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU - 560 048. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER HOODI SUB-DIVISION, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU - 560 048. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17188 WP No. 12349 of 2025 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HOODI SUB-DIVISION, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU - 560 048. 5. POLICE INSPECTOR, K.R. PURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 036. 6. BESCOM, E-7, K.R.PURA SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM DURAVANINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 036, ALSO AT K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 7. BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD (BWSSB), CAUVERY BHAVAN, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R5; SRI. B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R6 AND R7) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.08.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT/BBMP (R-4) UNDER REFERENCE NO. VIDE BBMP/KAAA/MAVA/05/2024-25 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17188 WP No. 12349 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has called in question validity of the order passed by Respondent No.4 dated 13.08.2024. 2. The petitioner submits that the petitioner was not served with notice as regards the proceedings under Section 248 of the BBMP Act, 2020 (for short 'the Act') and now respondent - BBMP is seeking to demolish the construction. It is further submitted that the petitioner has put up construction as per plan. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent - BBMP files a memo along with the orders passed under Sections 248 and 356. It is submitted that the petitioner ought to have preferred the statutory appeal under Section 253 of the Act as against the order passed under Section 248(3) before the Chief Commissioner, BBMP and not having done so, the Court may relegate the petitioner to avail substantive remedy provided for by way of statutory appeal. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17188 WP No. 12349 of 2025 4. Taking note of the passing of orders under Section 248 as well as order of Demolition under Section 356 as regards which petitioner has recourse at statutory appeal under Section 253, it would be appropriate to relegate the petitioner to avail of the substantive remedy as regards the orders passed under sections 248 and 356. 5. If the petitioner were to file an appeal before the Chief Commissioner within two weeks from today, same to be taken on record by the Chief Commissioner without raising any objection as regards limitation. 6. BBMP is restrained from taking any action pursuant to the order passed under Section 248(3) as well as Section 356 till interim relief sought for by the petitioner is considered and order is passed by the Appellate Authority. 7. It is noticed that the proceedings placed before the respondent - BBMP including order under Section 356(2) would indicate that there is one extra floor. In light of the same, petitioner to make necessary application to seek regularization as regards the extra floor in accordance with law either by loading of TDR, seeking grant of permission - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17188 WP No. 12349 of 2025 FAR or seek regularization under any other claim as is permissible in law. 8. Petitioner may also be required to seek for modification of plan under terms of Section 248 of the BBMP Act as regards such act to be done by the petitioner insofar as the extra floor is concerned. 9. If representation made to the respondent BBMP in that regard, necessary orders to be passed without waiting for conclusion of proceedings before the Appellate or other Authorities. Clearly it is for the petitioner to exhaust all opportunities for regularisation by the time the case is ripe for hearing. 10. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4 CT: BHK