- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010342332026 NC: 2026:KHC:39523 RP No. 270 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN REVIEW PETITION NO.270 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. C.N. DHARANISH S/O. C.S. NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO. C-1, "MAHARAJA ENCLAVE", #70, 2ND MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY, J.P. NAGAR, 4TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADITHYA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUBRAMANI D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI P.O. SHIVAKUMAR S/O. LATE P.B. OMKAR MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, NO.57, "OMKAR", B BLOCK, 2ND PARALLEL ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010342332026 NC: 2026:KHC:39523 RP No. 270 of 2026 3. THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH CITY CORPORATION, BLOCK II, 8TH MAIN CROSS, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BENGALURU SOUTH CITY CORPORATION, J.P. NAGAR SUB-DIVISION, JAYANAGAR CIRCLE, 10TH CROSS, 21ST MAIN ROAD, J.P. NAGAR II STAGE, BENGALURU-560 078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 TO R.4; VIDE ORDER DATED 28.07.2026 NOTICE TO R.1 IS DISPENSED WITH.) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 (1) READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.03.2026 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.9458/2026 AND DISMISS WRIT PETITION NO.9458/2026 AS INCOMPETENT FOR NON-JOINDER OF NECESSARY PARTY, IN TERMS OF UDIT NARAIN SINGH MALPAHARIA V. BOARD OF REVENUE (AIR 1963 SC 786), ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010342332026 NC: 2026:KHC:39523 RP No. 270 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. The case of the petitioner is that, at his behest, action was initiated against respondent No.1 by the then Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, now Greater Bengaluru Authority. That respondent No.1 did not make the petitioner a party to the writ proceedings and filed W.P.No.9458/2026. The said writ petition has been disposed of by this Court on 24.03.2026 with the following directions: "ORDER (i) Petitioner is given liberty to submit a request for a modified sanctioned plan. The said request will be made within a period of three weeks from today. If such an application is made within three weeks, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law and approve the modified sanctioned plan. Further, respondents shall also hear persons who have complained against petitioner, if any; (ii) Even after the grant of modified sanctioned plan, if any construction is found to be in violation of the same, the same shall be removed forthwith by the petitioner and if he fails to do so, the respondents have the authority to have the same demolished; - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010342332026 NC: 2026:KHC:39523 RP No. 270 of 2026 (iii) Until such a decision is taken by the respondents, the present eviction notices shall be kept in abeyance; (iv) However, if no application is made by the petitioner within three weeks as ordered, then in that event, the respondents are at liberty to proceed in accordance with the notices impugned herein; (v) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending IAs., if any, stand disposed of." 2. Aggrieved by the fact that the petitioner was not heard in the proceedings and that there is 100% deviation in the construction put up by respondent no.1 and the same cannot be regularized, the present review petition is filed. 3. If anybody puts up a construction in violation of the building bye-laws, there is an obligation cast upon the authorities concerned to have the same removed in accordance with law. The operative portion of the order passed in W.P.No.9458/2026 makes it clear that only that portion of the construction which can be saved as per the existing provision of law shall alone be saved and the remaining portion will have to be demolished. The order further states that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, now the Greater Bengaluru - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010342332026 NC: 2026:KHC:39523 RP No. 270 of 2026 Authority is obliged to hear the persons, who have complained against respondent No.1 herein. The petitioner is always at liberty to urge his contentions before the Greater Bengaluru Authority. There is no error apparent on the face of the record in the impugned order. 4. For the aforementioned reasons, the review petition is hereby dismissed. In view of dismissal of the petition, pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15