- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 17750 OF 2026 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: T N TYAGRAJ AGED ABOUT 70 R/O. 63/1, 8TH MAIN, 6TH PHASE, 1ST STAGE, MAHAGANAPATI NAGAR, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH - 560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.S. YADRAMI., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. POORNIMA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL, TUMAKURU-572101. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 3. TUMAKURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY IT'S COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU-572101. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, T.C.C. TUMAKURU-572101. 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER T.C.C. TUMAKURU-572101. 6. T.N. DHIRESH KUMAR S/O. T.N. NAGARAJU AGE MAJOR, R/O. SHIRA GATE, TUMAKURU. 7. B.M.RAJENDRA AGE MAJOR, OCC, R/O. SHIRA GATE, TUMAKURU-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BOPPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA FOR R1; SRI R. SUBRAMANYA., ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-3 BEARING NO. TUMAPA/HBL/CR-10/2025-26 DATED 10.06.2026 VIDE ANNX-F TO THE WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is served with the order under 321(3) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 [for short, 'the Act']. This order is dated 10.06.2026 [Annexure-F], and it reads that the provisional order is confirmed and the deviations would be removed by the petitioner at 4 ‘O’ Clock today [12.06.2026]. The question for consideration is whether the time allowed between the date of the order [10.06.2026] and the time fixed for demolition [at 4 ‘O’ Clock on 12.06.2026] is reasonable. This question must be answered in the light of the fact that there is an appellate remedy under 443-A of the Act, and a notice must be under Section 462 of the Act for demolition when there is failure to remove the offending construction. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 This Court must find that the time granted to the petitioner when there is an alternative remedy is definitely unreasonable, and this Court's interference is justified in the light of this finding but without entering into the merits of any contention as those aspects must be considered by the appellate forum. At the stage, Sri Subramanya R., the learned counsel for the third to fifth respondents, points out that the petitioners are putting up, even according to their own showing., an additional floor despite the proceedings under Section 321 of the Act. In response, Sri S.S.Yadrami, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, states that the petitioner is not putting up any further construction and the statement in this regard could be taken on record for just orders. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [A] The petition stands disposed of directing the third to fifth respondents to defer demolition - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 scheduled to be held today [12.06.2026] calling upon them to issue notice of demolition after seven [7] days from today observing that it would be open to the petitioner to avail remedy under Section 443- A of the Act. [B] This Court also observes that if the petitioner avails alternative remedy, the appellate authority must consider the request for an interim order, if any, independent of the arrangement now made as this Court's intervention is on the limited ground of opportunity to the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy. [C] It is reiterated that this Court has not examined merits of any of the rival contentions. [D] The statement on behalf of the petitioner that there will be no further construction is taken on record observing that it would be open to the authorities to take action to prevent - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28656 WP No. 17750 of 2026 construction contrary to the statement made before. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 11 Sl No.: 2