Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 69900 (KAR)

SRI DEEPAK SRIRAMULU v. BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE

WP/25309/2025 · 2025-08-30

M I Arun

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33820 WP No. 25309 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 25309 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SRI. DEEPAK SRIRAMULU, S/O. MR. B. SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.16330, WILLOWICK LANE FRISCO - 750333 TEXAS, USA. BY P.A. HOLDER MR. B. SREERAMULU, S/O. MR. B. VENKATARATHNAM, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.117/1, 10TH CROSS, (SOUTH) BALAJI NAGAR, MALLATHHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HUBLI SHRISHAIL AYYAPPA, ADVOCATE (P/H)) AND: 1. BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE CORPORATION OFFICE, BANGALORE-2 BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER, RAJAJESWARINAGAR ZONE, BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BANGALORE - 560 098. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & 2 (P/H)) Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33820 WP No. 25309 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 30/07/2025 VIDE ANNX-F NO. VAAA/RARANAVA/P.O/527/2025-26 AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the order passed under Sections 248 (3) and 356 (1) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short 'the Act'). 2. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 253 of the Act and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he would prefer an appeal, but prays for some interim protection as there are no regular sittings of the Appellate Authority and there is a threat of demolition. It is specifically contended that petitioner has not violated the sanction plan / building bye-laws and even if there is any violation, the same - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33820 WP No. 25309 of 2025 can be regularized in accordance with law and the impugned order is passed without application of mind. 4. Based on the above mentioned submission, the following order is passed:- ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby disposed of reserving the liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 253 of the Act. The said appeal shall be filed within a period of four weeks from today. ii. Respondents shall not precipitate the matter against the petitioner till a decision is taken in the appeal to be filed by the petitioner provided petitioner files the said appeal within a period of four weeks. iii. It is hereby clarified that no opinion has been expressed on the merits of the case and it is for respondent No.1 to decide the matter in accordance with law. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33820 WP No. 25309 of 2025 iv. Petitioner shall not put up any additional construction pending adjudication of the appeal. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE BH CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6