- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36294 WP No. 27306 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 27306 OF 2018 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. LATHIF BABU S/O REHMAN SAB AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.31 2ND FLOOR, 54TH CROSS ROAD 3RD BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.P.SHANKAR, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. YOGESH K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP) N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SRIRAMA MANDIR SUB-DIVISION BBMP NO.7, 1ST FLOOR, SIR M. VISHWESHWARAIAH COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, BANGALORE-560 010. 3. SMT. MANGALANGI AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS W/O SRI. GANGADHAR Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36294 WP No. 27306 of 2018 NO.30, OLD NO.492, 54TH CROSS ROAD 3RD BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.V.MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. C. BABU, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.04.2017 BEARING SAKANI A/(Sree Rama)/CO/33/16-17 MADE BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CRTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order dated 06.04.2017 passed under Section 321(3) of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 by respondent no.2 (vide Annexure-G to the writ petition) in respect of the property belonging to the petitioner and also the order passed in Appeal No.330/2017 by Karnataka Appellate - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36294 WP No. 27306 of 2018 Tribunal dated 31.05.2018 (vide Annexure-K to the writ petition), the present writ petition is filed. 2. The impugned orders have been passed on the ground that the petitioner has put up a construction in violation of the sanctioned plan and the building bye-laws and he has been directed to remove that portion of the building which is constructed in violation of the sanctioned plan and building bye-laws. Though the same is disputed by the petitioner, in the course of arguments the same is admitted. However, it is contended by the petitioner that the entire proceedings against him were commenced at the instigation of respondent no.3, who is his neighbor. It is further submitted that respondent no.3 has utilized 100% of her sital area without leaving any setback and the said construction is also in gross violation of building bye-laws. It is submitted that respondent nos.1 and 2 have been partial against the petitioner and have not initiated any action against respondent no.3. 3. Admittedly on facts, the petitioner is found to have put up construction in violation of building bye-laws and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36294 WP No. 27306 of 2018 sanctioned plan and I do not see any error in the impugned orders. However, if respondent no.3 has put up construction in violation of building bye-laws, BBMP is required to initiate appropriate action against respondent no.3 also. 4. Hence, the following: ORDER The writ petition is hereby dismissed with a direction to respondent-BBMP to enquire into the alleged violation of the law committed by respondent no.3 in putting up a construction on her property after giving a due opportunity of hearing to her and thereafter initiate necessary action, if required. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14