- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46999 WP No. 31453 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 31453 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SRI.SRIKANTH CHOWDARY MARRI @ SRIKANTH S/O SRI. RAM PRASAD AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT: NO.SF-1, NO.662, LOTUS KRISHNA APART "C" BLOCK, A.E.C.S. LAYOUT KUNDALAHALLI, BANGALORE-560037. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER B.B.M.P., N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER MAHADEVAPURA ZONE, BBMP BANGALORE-560048. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CONFIRMATION ORDER DATED 23.06.2025 BEARING NO.©©JA¦/¸ÀPÁC/zÉÆG«/¦.Dgï/18/2025-26 PASSED UNDER 248(3), Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46999 WP No. 31453 of 2025 AND SECTION 356 (1) OF THE BBMP ACT, 2020 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order bearing No.©©JA¦/¸ÀPÁC/zÉÆG«/¦.Dgï/18/2025-26 dated 23.06.2025 passed by respondent No.2 under Section 248(3) of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act, 2020' for short), as well as the order passed by respondent No.2 under Section 356(1) of the Act, 2020. 2. When this petition was taken up for final disposal, this Court suggested to the learned counsel for the petitioner that an appeal remedy is available and therefore, the petitioner ought to have approached the Appellate Authority. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that an appeal remedy is indeed provided but claimed that since the officer was not sitting, this petition had to be filed. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46999 WP No. 31453 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that appeals are being entertained by the Appellate Authority and submits that the petitioners may be relegated to the remedy of an appeal. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the petition is disposed off, directing the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of an appeal before the Chief Commissioner in accordance with law within a period of 15 days from today and not beyond. 5. The respondent No.2 is directed not to give effect to the impugned order for a period of 15 days from today. 6. It is open for the petitioner to seek interim relief before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority shall consider the request in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20