- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32999 WP No. 25304 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 25304 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SMT. KAVYA T D/O THIMME GOWDA, WIFE OF HEMANTH M.C, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.38, 6TH CROSS ROAD, R.T JAGANNATH LAYOUT, SEEGEHALLI, BASAVANAPURA, K. R. PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TQ. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAGADISH K.N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TOWN-PLANING M. S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE- 560 001. 2. CHIEF COMMISSSIONER, B.B.M.P. N. R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.R. PURAM SUB-DIVISION, BBMP, BANGALORE-560 036. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC.) 7TH EAST SUB-DIVISION, DOORAVANINAGAR BESCOM, BENGALURU-560 016. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32999 WP No. 25304 of 2025 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SMT. ANUSHA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-J DATED NO.BBMP/SAKAA/K R PURA, U VI/P.R/325/2023-2024, DATED 21.03.2024, ANNEXURE-N VIDE NO.BBMP/SAKAA/K R PURA U VI/P.R/106/2025-26 DATED 29.07.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 AND ANNEXURE-P VIDE NO.EII(I)/I-7/E I(TA)/2024-25/725-26 DATED 01.08.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT 4 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by respondent No.3 under Section 248(3) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short 'the Act') and the communication issued by respondent No.4 for disconnection of electrical supply. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 253 of the Act and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32999 WP No. 25304 of 2025 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he would prefer an appeal, but prays for some interim protection as there are no regular sittings of the Appellate Authority and there is a threat of demolition / disconnection of electricity supply. It is specifically contended that the petitioner has not violated the sanction plan / building bye- laws and even if there is any violation, the same can be regularized in accordance with law and the impugned order is passed without application of mind. 4. Based on the above mentioned submission, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby disposed of reserving the liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 253 of the Act. The said appeal shall be filed within a period of three weeks from today. ii. Respondents shall not precipitate the matter against the petitioner till a decision is taken in the appeal to be filed by the petitioner provided the petitioner files the said appeal within a period of three weeks. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32999 WP No. 25304 of 2025 iii. It is hereby clarified that no opinion has been expressed on the merits of the case and it is for respondent No.2 to decide the matter in accordance with law. iv. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1