- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.5536 OF 2026 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. S. DAYALAN S/O LATE SRINIVAIAN AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.21/A 42ND CROSS, 4TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU-560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALIDHAR H.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDAH DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY N.R. SQUARE BANGALORE -560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING (WEST) THE GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 BHASYAM PARK, SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 009. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER OF TOWN PLANNING (WEST) THE GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY BHASYAM PARK SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 009. 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MALLESHWARAM SUB DIVISION THE GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY BHASYAM PARK SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA., FOR R.1; SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 TO R.5.) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION, QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION DATED 02.01.2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-'A', ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS (GREATER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY) REJECTING THE MODIFIED PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER, 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner as well as his neighbour have put up construction in violation of the building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan. It resulted in action being initiated against both of them by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and both of them approaching this Court for relief. This Court in W.P.Nos.6290/2025 c/w 11293/2025 passed the following: "ORDER As per the request of parties, writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the BBMP to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner as well as contesting private respondent in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. Parties are also given liberty to make necessary representation for approval of a modified building plan in accordance with law. While taking the decision, BBMP will take into consideration all the orders that have been passed by various Courts in the litigation said to have been taken place in respect of the properties concerned." - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 2. Thereafter, both the petitioner as well as his neighbour submitted modified plans and the same came to be rejected by the BBMP. Aggrieved by the same, the neighbour of the petitioner preferred W.P.No.1020/2026. This Court, on 19.02.2026, has passed the following order: "1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: "a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Endorsement issued by the Respondent No.4 to the Petitioner in Sa.Ka.Ni.Aa(Ma)/PR/443/2025-26, dated 19.12.2025, which is at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition. b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus by restraining the Respondents from issuing any further such false notices or endorsements until disposal of Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court, which is pending for adjudication in regard to "Akrama Sakrama Scheme". c) Grant such other relies as the facts and circumstances of the case may deem fit, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. The provisional order placed on record indicates that the deviation in question is less than 50%. 3. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, by order dated 19.02.2025 in W.P.No.21041/2021, has held that where a building plan had been sanctioned prior to the amendment introducing Section 321A to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, unauthorised construction could be considered for regularisation. The Co-ordinate Bench further observed that where the setback violation is less than 25% in the case of non-residential buildings and less than 50% in the case of residential buildings, and in view of the fact that the issue is presently pending consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court, the benefit of regularisation would enure to the petitioner if the Apex Court were to uphold the validity of the amendment. 4. In my considered view, the said observations would squarely apply to the facts of the present case. The deviation, as noted in the provisional order, is less than 50%, and therefore falls within the parameters contemplated by the Co-ordinate Bench. 5. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of holding that the petitioner would be entitled to seek regularisation of the unauthorised construction in the event that the Hon’ble Apex Court upholds the amendment introducing Section 321A to the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. Until such adjudication by the Apex Court, the impugned order shall remain in abeyance and shall not be given effect to. 6. Needless to observe, in the event the Hon’ble Apex Court were to strike down the amendment, it would - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 be open to the respondents to proceed in accordance with law and take such action as may be permissible under the statutory framework then prevailing." 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per the amended law, he is entitled to save some portion of the construction put up by him. According to the petitioner, he thought he could have saved the entire construction, and hence, he submitted the modified plan accordingly. However, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, now Greater Bengaluru Authority, without stating as to the details of the deviation and the extent of deviation that has to be removed, has communicated a one-line order to the petitioner that his modified plan has been rejected. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits, if the Greater Bengaluru Authority were to communicate to him what is the extent of deviation and what needs to be removed, he is willing to remove the excess construction. 4. Learned counsel for the Greater Bengaluru Authority ('GBA' for short), upon instructions, submits that they are - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15007 WP No. 5536 of 2026 willing to communicate to the petitioner the deviations that are required to be removed as per the amended law. He further submits that the officers of GBA will visit the property of the petitioner on 18th March 2026, conduct the necessary inspection and submit a report in this regard. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The concerned Officers of GBA shall visit the property of the petitioner on 18th March 2026, survey the same and submit a report as to the extent of deviation therein. The petitioner shall remove the excess construction, within one month thereafter, failing which the respondent-GBA shall have the same removed. (ii) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41