- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1688 WP No. 15569 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 15569 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. C N KRISHNAKUMAR S/O NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT SUBBANAYAKA STREET, KOTE CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT 577101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MADHU YADAV., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SACHIN B S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL CHIKKAMAGALUR 577101. 2. CHANDAN C V S/O C S VIJAYKUMAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS NO 599, SUBBNAYAKA STREET, KOTE CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT 577101 ALSO AT WARD NO 6, KOTE CHIKKAMAGALUR 577101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAGARAJAPPA A., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. NARAYAN.M.NAILK ., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1688 WP No. 15569 of 2024 DIRECT THE R1 TO IMPLEMENT THE NOTICE DATED 07/06/2024 IN BEARING NO. CMC/CKM/TP/01/2024-25 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE R1 TO STOP FURTHER CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLISH THE EXISTING ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION PUT UP BY THE R2 TO THE EXTENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION DONE IN CONTRARY TO THE APPROVED BUILDING PLAN ISSUED BY THE R1 IN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The prayer in this writ petition is to implement the notice dated 07.06.2024, by which, the 2nd respondent was called upon to stop the construction. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submit that pursuant to Annexure-A, the construction had indeed been stopped. It is therefore obvious that the prayer in the writ petition would not survive for consideration. 3. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent also submits that the 2nd respondent has also made an application - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1688 WP No. 15569 of 2024 for modification of the approved plan and that plan, if approved, the illegalities pointed out by the petitioner would stand resolved. He also submits that since this writ petition is pending, the 1st respondent is not taking any action in the matter. 4. In this view of the matter, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation said to have been submitted by the 2nd respondent on 15.07.2024 seeking for a revised approved plan, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Until then, it is obvious that the 2nd respondent cannot proceed with the construction. 5. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36