- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31570 WP No. 24438 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 24438 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: AYUB P.S., S/O SYED BASHA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO. T-3, MARIYAMMA APARTMENT, FREZER TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 005. …PETITIONER [BY SRI MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATE (PH)] AND: 1. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) E-8 SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM BANASAWADI, BENGALURU - 560 043. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BANASAWADI SUB DIVISION BWSSB, HBR LAYOUT, 1ST BLOCK, BENGALURU 560043. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BBMP MARUTI SEVA NAGAR SUB-DIVISION, R.S. PALYA, KAMMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 033. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI LIKITH R. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI PAVAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3) Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31570 WP No. 24438 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICES BEARING NO. DATED 21.08.2024 AND 22.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE R3 BBMP AUTHORITY SAME AT ANNEXURE-H SERIES, DIRECT THE R3 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NOT TO TAKE ANY COERCIVE ACTION AGAINST THE PETITIONER PROPERTY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging notices dated 21.08.2024 and 22.10.2024 issued by respondent no.3 at Annexure-H series, this writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Mohammed Tahir, learned counsel for petitioner submitted, petitioner had purchased House property no.5Ac- 420, PID no.89-398-5AC-420 situated at Hennur Road, Banaswadi Road (HRBR) Layout, 2nd Block Extension, Kalyananagar, Bengaluru, under registered Sale Deed dated 30.05.2017. For said premises, respondent no.1 had granted temporary electricity connection on 27.08.2021, which was being extended. However, respondent no.1 issued show-cause notice calling upon petitioner to submit documents with regard - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31570 WP No. 24438 of 2025 to title, sanction plan, etc., and disconnected power supply. Despite petitioner's visit and reminders, same was not restored. It was submitted, one Tej Raj Ranka had filed civil suit against petitioner's vendor and obtained ex-parte decree with regard to property in question. Immediately, after coming to know same, petitioner filed suit for declaration against said Tej Raj Ranka in O.S.no.26411/2019, which ended up in compromise on 09.12.2023 decreeing petitioner's rights insofar as property in question. On 31.05.2025, petitioner has obtained E-Khata also. Despite same, impugned show-cause notices were issued in name of Tej Raj Ranka and petitioner. In view of above, disruption of power supply was in violation of principles of natural justice and without notice to petitioner. In any case, petitioner had filed objections/reply to show-cause notices as per Annexure-B dated 15.07.2025 but same was not considered. On above grounds, sought for allowing writ petition. 3. Sri Likith R.Prakash, learned counsel for respondent no.1-BESCOM, Sri B.L.Sanjeev, learned counsel for respondent no.2-BWSSB and Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.3-BBMP opposed writ petition. It was submitted, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31570 WP No. 24438 of 2025 writ petition was against mere show-cause notices and was not tenable. 4. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition. 5. From above it is seen, main grievance of petitioner is against disruption of power supply being in violation of principles of natural justice. Perusal of impugned show-cause notices at Annexure-H series would indicate that same are issued in name of Tej Raj Ranka. Perusal of compromise decree in O.S.no.26411/2019 at Annexure-F would prima facie indicate that petitioner had obtained decree of declaration of his title in respect of property in question against said Tej Raj Ranka. Annexure-G would indicate that Khata stands in name of petitioner. Under such circumstances, issuance of notices in name of Tej Raj Ranka with respect to property in question would not appear justified. 6. However, instead of directing respondents to issue fresh notice to petitioner and since petitioner is aware of contents of notices at Annexure-H series, they could be directed to be treated as show-cause notices issued to petitioner himself and respondents could be directed to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31570 WP No. 24438 of 2025 consider petitioner's reply as per Annexure-B and pass appropriate orders thereon. 7. Since Annexure-B is submitted to respondent no.1 only, petitioner is directed to submit copies of same or separate replies to respondents no.2 and 3 also within two weeks from today. On receipt of same, respondent-authorities are required to verify and take appropriate decision under intimation to petitioner. Until then, electricity supply, water and sewerage connection, if granted earlier and disrupted, shall be continued. With above observations/directions, writ petition stands disposed of. Sri Likith R.Prakash, learned counsel for respondent no.1- BESCOM, Sri B.L.Sanjeev, learned counsel for respondent no.2- BWSSB and Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.3-BBMP are permitted to file memo of appearance within two weeks. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1