- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 29456 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: SRI P. VIJAY @ VIOJAYRAJ S/O PALAYAN, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, NO 15/1, 7TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, CHINNAPPA GARDAN, CORPORATION NO.9, BENGALURU - 560 046. …PETITIONER (BY SRI BHUVAN K.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (E) EAST DIVISION-01, C-O AND M, BESCOM, PILLANNA GARDEN, TANNERY ROAD, NEAR BILAL MASJID, BENGALURU- 560046. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER BENSEN TOWN KA AND PA DIVISION, NANDIDURGA ROAD, BESCOM BENGALURU - 560 045. 3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, BBMP, N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE - 560 002. Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE, VASANTH NAGAR, SUB-DIVISION, NO.3, 3RD CROSS, BALAPPA GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 051. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.V.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION BY QUASHING THE LETTER DATED 04/07/2025, BEARING NO. SA.KAA.NE. M(V)/E-1/SA.AA.(T)/572 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-A. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RESTORE THE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BEARING METERS BEARING NO.RR 1EEH 58933 TO 58938 IN RESPECT TO SCHEDULE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER BY REFIXING THE SAID METERS IN THE BUILDING OF THE PETITIONER AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A., THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging letter dated 04.07.2025 at Annexure-A issued by respondent no.1, this writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Bhuvan KP, learned counsel for petitioner submitted, petitioner was owner of property bearing Door no.15/1, Corporation no.9, located at 7th Cross, Chinnappa Garden, Bengaluru, measuring 34 ft. 6 inches East to West and 25 ft. 6 inches North to South having purchased it under registered Sale Deed dated 09.04.2008 and Supplementary Deed dated 30.09.2022 as per Annexure - B. It was submitted, he had paid property tax to BBMP and Khata was transferred to his name. Copies of E-khata and tax paid receipts are at Annexures - C and D. It was submitted, after obtaining approved building plan and licence, petitioner had constructed residential building thereon. It was submitted, thereafter petitioner had availed permanent power supply connection from respondents (BESCOM) with meter installation bearing no.RR. 1EEH 58933 to 58938. Such being case, petitioner was issued with impugned letter to show cause against disruption of power - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 supply on ground that BBMP had informed that construction put-up by petitioner was unauthorised and in violation of approved sanction plan. It was submitted, against said letter issued by BBMP authorities, petitioner had preferred appeal before respondent no.3. Pending consideration, disruption of power supply by respondents no.1 and 2 would not be justified. On said grounds sought for allowing writ petition. 3. On other hand, Sri HV Devaraju, learned counsel, who is directed to accept notice for respondents no.1 and 2 and Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for respondents no.3 and 4 opposed writ petition. It was submitted, mere pendency of appeal before respondent no.3 would not discharge respondents from performing their statutory functions and especially, in view of directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court in para no.21 of Rajendra Kumar Barjatya and Another v. U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3767. On said grounds sought for dismissal of writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 4. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused writ petition. 5. From above it is seen, petitioner’s grievance against letter at Annexure-A issued by respondent no.1 to respondent no.2. Since orders passed under Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Act 2020, ('BBMP Act' for short) are under challenge in appeal before Commissioner, Bengaluru Bruhat Mahanagara Palike, and same was under consideration, respondents no.1 and 2 would not be justified in taking action against petitioner. If it is so, initiation of action by respondents for disconnection of power supply would not be justified. Therefore, letter at Annexure-A stand discharged reserving liberty to respondent no.4 to take action, if found necessary, after disposal of appeal. 6. A direction is issued to respondent no.3 to dispose of appeal within a period of two months from date of receipt certified copy of this order, but keeping in mind directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court in para no.21 Barjatya’s case (supra) and intimate result of appeal to respondent no.2. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38868 WP No. 29456 of 2025 7. Until then respondent no.2 is directed to continue power supply to petitioner premises subject to payment of consumption charges or advance consumption charges as applicable. With above observations, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg*:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17