- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29935 WP No. 23286 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.23286 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. VIJAY KUMAR SULTANIA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O SHYAM SUNDER SULTANIA NO.251, SHREE SHYAM KUNJ 4TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN NEAR CHINAMAYA MISSION ASHRAM DOLLARS COLONY, J P NAGAR 4TH PHASE, BANGLAORE SOUTH J P NAGAR ALSO AT NO.299, 15TH CROSS J P NAGAR, 5TH PHASE BANGALORE - 560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.N. PHANINDRA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI ARNAV A. BAGALWADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF BBMP BANGALORE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29935 WP No. 23286 of 2025 KARNATAKA - 560 002. 3. OFFICE OF ZONAL COMMISSIONER (SOUTH) BBMP, 2ND FLOOR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BUILDING 9TH MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS 2ND BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 011. 4. THE REVENUE INSPCETOR(BBMP) JAYANAGAR DIVISION JAYANAGAR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R.1; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 TO R.4.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE OF SEALING DATED 24.07.2025 BEARING NO.KUM.A(JN)/PR/336/25-26 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 HEREIN PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29935 WP No. 23286 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. On the ground that the petitioner has put up construction on his property beyond permissible limits, an order under Section 248(3) read with Section 356(1) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 ('the BBMP Act' for short) has been passed by respondent No.3 against the petitioner. According to the said order, 30 days' time has been given to the petitioner to remove the violations and rectify the deviations. The said order is passed on 02.07.2025. However, subsequent to the said order, the building has been sealed on 28.07.2025. 2. Aggrieved by the actions of the respondents, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed under Section 248(3) read with Section 356(1) of the BBMP Act (vide Annexure-C to the writ petition) and also the notice of sealing the building (vide Annexure-A to the writ petition). However, in the course of arguments, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29935 WP No. 23286 of 2025 submitted that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 253 of the BBMP Act to challenge the order passed by respondent No.3 (Annexure-C) under Section 248(3) read with Section 356(1) of the BBMP Act and he would approach the Appellate Authority regarding the same. 3. Admittedly, 30 days' time was granted to the petitioner in the order passed under Section 248(3) read with Section 356(1) of the BBMP Act. In the light of the same, the respondents could not have sealed the building of the petitioner earlier to it. To that extent, the writ petition can be entertained. 4. With regard to the correctness of the order passed under Section 248(3) read with Section 356(1) of the BBMP Act, the petitioner is always having the liberty to approach the Appellate Authority under Section 253 of the BBMP Act. However, in the light of the hardship being put to the petitioner by sealing the building of the petitioner - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29935 WP No. 23286 of 2025 earlier to the notified date, in my opinion, interest of justice would be met, if the respondents are directed not to precipitate the matter against the petitioner for a period of four weeks from today. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The impugned notice dated 24.07.2025 issued by respondent No.4 (vide Annexure-A to the writ petition) is hereby set aside; (ii) The petitioner shall not put up any additional construction on the property and consequent to the removal of the seal put on the building; (iii) The respondents shall not initiate any adverse action against the petitioner for a period of four weeks from today; (iv) The petitioner is given the liberty to file necessary appeal before the Appellate Authority in terms of Section 253 of the BBMP Act; (v) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. sd/ (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1