- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 25561 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: SMT. SWETHA S., W/O J M ASHOK KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1727, S M GOWDA ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGARPETE, KOLAR - 563 114. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GIRISH KUMAR R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ROOM NO.236, 2ND FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HEAD OFFICE, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, K R CIRCLE, Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. THE ASSISSTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC), BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., 4TH EAST SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU - 560 066. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., AGA FOR R1; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI C. CHANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED NIL IN VIDE BEARING NO. PA.SAM.SAKAAEM(V)/SAEM(THAA)/PUU4/2024-2025/5599-601 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC)., 4TH EAST SUB DIVISION, BESCOM, WHITEFIELD WHICH IS MENTIONED AS ANNEXURE-A, AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO RESTORE THE ELECTRICITY CONNECTION TO ACCOUNT ID 7101659477 FORTHWITH. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Challenging notice dated nil issued by respondent no.4 at Annexure-A and to restore electricity connection to meter bearing RR.no.4ETP30932, this writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Girish Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner submitted petitioner is owner of site no.7, which is portion of BBMP Khata/Sl.no.2886, Municipal no.69, present Khata no.2820 formed in property bearing old Sy.no.42 and new Sy.no.166 situated at Pattanduru Agrahara, K.R.Puram Hobli, Mahadevpura, Bengaluru East, measuring 30 X 40 fts. Said property was purchased under Sale Deed dated 24.06.2024 at Annexure-B. Thereafter, petitioner got Khata changed in his name and was paying taxes to BBMP. Petitioner had put up construction and obtained temporary electricity connection for same through meter bearing RR.no.4ETP30932. It was submitted, petitioner was paying consumption charges to BESCOM. However, respondent no.4 issued impugned notice to petitioner to show cause against disruption of power on ground that construction was put up without obtaining sanction plan. Petitioner was called upon to produce 'No objection certificate' from BBMP within 7 days. It was submitted, prior to issuance of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 notice, there was no inspection or enquiry conducted to determine construction put up by petitioner was in violation. Therefore, same is required to be quashed. It was further submitted, notice was never served upon petitioner. Therefore, disruption of power supply was in violation of principles of natural justice. On above grounds, sought allowing writ petition. 3. Learned AGA for respondent no.1, Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Sri C.Channegowda, learned counsel for respondent no.3 opposed writ petition. It was submitted, on receipt of complaints about construction put up by petitioner was without obtaining sanction plan and in violation of building by-laws, inspection was conducted and notice under Section 313 of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 ('Act' for short) was issued. On communication being sent to respondents no.3 and 4, notice at Annexure-A was issued. It was submitted, same would also be in tune with directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 21 of Rajendra Kumar Barjatya and Another v. U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3767. On said grounds, sought dismissal of writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition. 5. From above, it is seen petitioner's challenge against Annexure-B is on ground that it is in violation of principles of natural justice. As submitted by learned counsel for respondents, Annexure-A is only a notice. Petitioner had not stated about having filed reply to same. Even if it were not served upon petitioner, on date of issuance, at least after receipt of Annexure-A (since copy is produced along with writ petition), petitioner ought to have submitted reply. 6. In view of above and taking note of directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 21 of Rajendra Kumar Barjatya's case, instead of retaining writ petition, it would be appropriate to dispose of writ petition by permitting petitioner to file reply and directing respondents to consider same and pass appropriate orders thereafter. 7. Hence, writ petition is disposed of. Respondents are directed to permit petitioner to submit objections/reply to Annexure-A within a period of 15 days from today, along with - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32920 WP No. 25561 of 2025 necessary documents and keeping in mind directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya's case. On receipt of same, respondent no.4 to get assertions in reply verified from respondent no.2 and thereafter, pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter. Until then, power supply to petitioner's premises through meter bearing RR.no.4ETP30932 is directed to be continued subject to payment of advance consumption charges, as may be required. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1