- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25078 WP No. 20165 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 20165 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. JANARDHAN RAO SON OF NAGARAJ RAO AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NOW R/AT 6, MLA MUNIRAJ COMPOUND LAKE VIEW DEFENCE COLONY SHETTYHALLI, JALAHALLI WEST BENGALU RU-560 015. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDESH KUMAR .M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 002. 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER DASARAHALLI DIVISION BBMP OFFICE, BENGALURU-560 057. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SHETTYHALLI SUB DIVISION, BBMP NEAR GOVT SCHOOL, S.M. ROAD RAVIDRA NAGAR BENGALURU-560 015. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SMT. ANUSHA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R3) Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25078 WP No. 20165 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE TEMPORARY ORDER ISSUED UNDER SECTION 248(1) AND SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 248 (2) OF THE BBMP ACT 2020 DATED 21/04/2025 BEARING NO. BBMP/ZC/D2/PSR/UAC/14/2025-26 AS PER VIDE ANNEXURE- K AND L. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Though this matter is listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. The short point that needs consideration at the hands of this Court is as to whether respondent No.3 could have issued a communication vide Annexure-J calling upon the BESCOM to disconnect the power supply on the premise that petitioner’s construction is illegal. Records reveal that respondent No.2 has issued a provisional order under Section 248(1) of the Bruhath Bengaluru - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25078 WP No. 20165 of 2025 Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020, and the same is served on the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the provisional order is appealable before respondent No.1 under Section 253 of the BBMP Act, 2020. However, the learned counsel appearing for the BBMP contends that the Act does not provide any appellate remedy against a provisional order. It is specifically pointed out that, under Section 253 of the BBMP Act, 2020, only a final order passed under Section 248(3) is amenable to appeal, and not a provisional order passed under Section 248(1) or (2). 4. Be that as it may, since the proceedings under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020 are admittedly still pending, this Court is of the considered view that the communication issued by respondent No.3, as per Annexure–J, is premature. Accordingly, the petitioner is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25078 WP No. 20165 of 2025 entitled to interim protection until the said proceedings reach finality. 5. The records further disclose that the petitioner had obtained both a licence and a sanctioned building plan from the competent authority of the Gram Panchayat, which governed the area as of the year 2007. Given that the property in question was within the jurisdiction of the Gram Panchayat at the relevant time, the petitioner is well within his rights to contest the validity of the provisional order issued under Section 248(1) and (2) of the BBMP Act, 2020. 6. In light of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction that the impugned communication issued by respondent No.3, bearing Annexure–J, shall remain in abeyance until the conclusion of the proceedings under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to interfere - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25078 WP No. 20165 of 2025 with the provisional order issued under Section 248(1) and (2) of the BBMP Act, 2020. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2