- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO.23662 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: SRI RAVINDER REDDY PATIL S/O SRI LATE RAI REDDY PATIL AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R.AT NO.6, 1ST FLOOR TULASI NILAYA 2ND LEFT CROSS, MARATHAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 037 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ROOM NO.236, 2ND FLOOR VIKASA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE, N R SQUARE BANGALURU – 560 002 3. THE BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR CORPORATE OFFICE K R CIRCLE BANGALORE – 560 001 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 EAST SUB DIVISION NO.4 WHITEFILED BENGALURU – 560 036 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VAHEEDA, AGA FOR R1; SMT. SINCHANA M R, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. H.V.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 30.06.2025 BEARING NO.¸ÀPÁEA(«)/¸ÀEA(vÁ)/¥ÀÆ4/2025- 26/1776 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND, DIRECTED FOR DISCONNECTION WITHOUT THERE BEING FINALITY AS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION ORDER AND THE APPEAL IS ALSO PENDING CONSIDERATION; b) GRANT ANY OTHER REMEDY THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Writ petition is filed for following reliefs: a. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ of like nature and quash the Notice dated 30/06/2025, bearing No.¸ÀPÁEA(«)/¸ÀEA(vÁ)/¥ÀÆ4/2025-26/1776 issued by the 4th respondent vide Annexure E to the writ petition and, directed for disconnection without there being finality as against the confirmation order and the appeal is also pending consideration, etc. 2. Sri Srinivas V., learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is owner of property bearing vacant site - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 no.7, portion of BBMP Khata no.4807/Sy.no.65/4, carved out of converted Sy.no.65/4, (old Sy.no.65/1), situated at Pattandur Agrahara village, K.R.Pura Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, having purchased it under Sale Deed dated 05.01.2024 at Annexure-A. Thereafter Khata was changed in his name and he has paid tax upto date. It was submitted, petitioner applied for and obtained sanction of building plan and licence as depicted at Annexures- D and D1, provided with temporary electricity connection from respondents no.3 and 4 and put up construction. Such being case, petitioner was shocked to receive impugned notice dated 30.06.2025 Annexure - E) ordering disconnection of power supply to his building. It was submitted said notice was preceded with any notice served on petitioner. It was further submitted, petitioner has completed construction of building and in case non-restoration of power supply, he would put to hardship. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner filed present writ petition. 3. Smt.Vaheeda, learned AGA for respondent no.1, Smt. Sinchana, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 Sri HV Devaraju, learned counsel for respondents no.3 and 4 opposed writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for respondents no.3 and 4 would submit that impugned notice in nature of order was passed on receipt of intimation by Zonal Commissioner, BBMP, vide Annexure - E, prohibiting electricity supply to building being constructed without sanction plan as well as in violation of sanctioned plan. On receipt of said communication, spot inspection report was obtained from jurisdictional Assistant Engineer and after finding construction to be apparently in violation of bye-laws, impugned order at Annexure-E was passed. Therefore, impugned order was justified. 5. In reply, learned counsel for petitioner would submit that Annexures - D and D1 would indicate that petitioner had obtained sanctioned plan and proceeded with construction. Therefore, intimation of Zonal Commissioner, BBMP, would not apply to petitioner. 6. Learned Counsel for petitioner further submits that under similar circumstances this Court in WP no.22554/2025, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 disposed of on 30.07.2025, issued certain directions and same would cover subject matter of present petition also, insofar as petitioner’s premises. 7. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused writ petition records. 8. Above facts reveal that petitioner is aggrieved by impugned notices in nature of order threatening of disconnection of power supply to petitioner's premises. It is held by this Court in decision relied on that same would impose serious civil consequences and petitioner would be entitled for opportunity of showing cause against proposed action. Same would squarely apply to present petition also. 9. In view of above, Writ petition is disposed of. Impugned Notice/order dated 30.06.2025, bearing .¸ÀPÁEA(«)/¸ÀEA(vÁ)/¥ÀÆ4/2025-26/1776 issued by respondent no.4 vide Annexure - E is quashed. However, in facts and circumstances of this case, it shall be treated as show-cause notice by petitioner and objections, if any, to be filed before respondent no.4 within two weeks from today. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31089 WP No. 23662 of 2025 If same is filed within time indicated, respondent no.4 shall consider petitioner's objections and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within two weeks thereafter. Until then, respondents to restore temporary power connection to petitioner's building subject to payment of advance consumption charges etc., as may be required. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12