- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50931 WP No. 36782 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 36782 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SAILA KUMARI VEMA W/O SHIVA PRAKASH VEMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SRI. SHIVA PRAKASH VEMA S/O LATE SUBBARAYUDU VEMA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS BOTH ARE PRESENTLY R/AT VILLA NO.10 ALLIANCE 10 DOWNING KANNAMANGALA BANGALORE - 560 067. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHIEF COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU KARNATAKA - 560 002. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER B.E.C.C WHITE FIELD SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU - 560 066. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50931 WP No. 36782 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 27.11.2025 BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE ALL THE ORDERS AND NOTICES STATED IN THE NOTICE DATED 27.11.2025 BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A TO PETITIONER FOR NECESSARY ACTION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged a notice bearing No.ೇೆಂಾ/ೆಂಪ ನಾ/ಸ ಾಅ/ೈಉ/ಆನಂ.353/2025- 26, dated 27.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 pursuant to an order dated 15.06.2024 passed under Section 248(3) read with Section 356 of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (henceforth referred to as 'BBMP Act, 2020'). 2. When it was brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the petitioners that a remedy of an appeal is provided under Section 250 of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 and that this writ petition is not maintainable, the learned counsel fairly submitted that an - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50931 WP No. 36782 of 2025 appeal is indeed provided but he contended that since the respondents have proposed to take action pursuant to the order passed under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020, the petitioners have no time to file an appeal. He therefore, prays that until an appeal is filed, the respondents be directed not to take any action pursuant to the order under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020. 3. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that since the remedy of an appeal is provided, no indulgence can be shown to the petitioners in this writ petition. 4. It appears from the notice impugned in this writ petition that the confirmation order under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020, was passed on 15.06.2024. Therefore, the petitioners must have filed an appeal within thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, since there is an appeal remedy before the Chief Commissioner, it is not appropriate for this Court to pass any orders upsetting the order passed under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020 on the grounds urged by the petitioners in this writ petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50931 WP No. 36782 of 2025 5. Hence, this writ petition stands disposed off granting four weeks time from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, to the petitioners to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Until then, the respondents are directed not to take any precipitative action against the building constructed by the petitioners in property No.25A, Khata No.938/890/1125/22 known as White Rose situate at Pattandur Agrahara, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru South. 6. It is made clear that this interim protection is given only for the limited purpose of enabling the petitioners to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority and shall not be construed as if it is granted until disposal of the appeal. It is however, open for the petitioners to seek interim relief before the Appellate Authority. 7. Sri. Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents is permitted to file memo of appearance within ten days from today. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1