- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35564 WP No. 31518 of 2024 C/W WP No. 26864 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 31518 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 26864 OF 2023 (LB-BMP) IN WP No. 31518/2024 BETWEEN: SRI. MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O. LATE MOHAMMED ABUBAKAR, NO.7, AHMED SAIT ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 005. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURESH S. *LOKRE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SHRAVAN S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER B.B.M.P., NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, TOWN PLANNING (EAST), B.B.M.P., UTILITY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, B.B.M.P., SHIVAJINAGAR SUB-DIVISION QUEEN'S ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 *CORRECTED VIDE CHAMBER ORDER DATED 14.10.2025 Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35564 WP No. 31518 of 2024 C/W WP No. 26864 of 2023 4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, B.B.M.P., SHIVAJINAGAR SUB DIVISION BENGALURU - 560 001 5. MR. SYED AFZAL, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O LATE ALHAJ SYED AHMED R/AT NO.34/1, CRESCENT SAMAFFA BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, BENSON 'A' CROSS ROAD, BENSON TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 046 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ANNEXURE-A THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IN APPEAL NO. 33/2024 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT CHIEF COMMISSIONER BBMP DATED 19/10/2024 AND ETC. IN WP NO. 26864/2023 BETWEEN: SRI. MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED ABUBAKAR, NO.07, AHMED SAIT ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 005 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURESH S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SHRAVAN S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35564 WP No. 31518 of 2024 C/W WP No. 26864 of 2023 AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER B.B.M.P. NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER B.B.M.P. SHIVAJINAGAR DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 052 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER B.B.M.P. SHIVAJINAGAR DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 052 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KARTHIKEYAN B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-A IN THE APPEAL NO.199/2022 DATED 17.06.2023 BEING THE ORDER OF DEMOLITION DATED 19/09/2022, ISSUED UNDER REFERENCE NO. EE/SJN/356/103/2022-23 BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND R3 AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The impugned orders have been passed by the Chief Commissioner-BBMP, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner herein in respect of the construction put up by him on his property. In the said impugned orders it is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35564 WP No. 31518 of 2024 C/W WP No. 26864 of 2023 recorded that the petitioner has made excess construction than what has been permitted as per the sanctioned plan and the same is ordered to be demolished. 2. In the course of the arguments, Sri.Suresh S.Lokre, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the sanctioned plan has been erroneously issued by the BBMP, taking into consideration the area of the petitioner's property to be 700 square feet instead of 900 square feet and hence, the impugned orders have to be set aside. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has been granted a sanction plan to put up construction on his property. He has admittedly constructed a building which is in deviation of the said sanctioned plan. Even otherwise, this Court cannot decide a disputed question of fact as to whether the building has been constructed in accordance with the sanctioned plan or not while exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35564 WP No. 31518 of 2024 C/W WP No. 26864 of 2023 4. Learned counsel for the BBMP, upon instructions, submits that the building constructed is in violation of the sanctioned plan as detailed in the impugned orders. 5. For the aforementioned reason, I do not see any reasons to interfere in the impugned orders and hence, the Writ Petitions are hereby dismissed. 6. It is needless to state that the petitioner is having the liberty to approach the BBMP for a revised sanctioned plan, if the same is permissible in accordance with law. All pending I.A's are hereby dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51 CT-SG