- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2221 WP No. 494 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 494 OF 2026 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MUNIYAN G S/O LATE GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. SRI. SANDEEP KUMAR M, S/O SRI. MUNIYAN G, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.20/2, BALA YESU CHURCH MAIN ROAD, L.R. NAGAR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 047. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.S. NARESH SANTHOSH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, J C ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001, NOW GREATER BANGALORE AUTHORITY. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER B.B.M.P, DOMLUR SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 071. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2221 WP No. 494 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 24.12.2025 IN NO. SA KA. AA/DO U/ NO/2025- 26/321 ISSUED BY THE R2 A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-P AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS FOR RENEWAL OF THE PLAN AND LICENCE AS PRAYED FOR A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-N DATED 21.12.2024 EXPEDITIOUSLY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Sri. Pawan Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (a) ISSUE a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the notice dated 24.12.2025 in No.Sa.Ka.Aa/Do.U/No/2025-26/321 issued by the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-P and direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioners for renewal of the plan and licence as prayed for, a copy of which is dated 21-12-2024 produced at Annexure-N expeditiously, to meet the ends of justice. (b) GRANT such other order or direction as it deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The property bearing No.20/2, Balaiah Naidu Street of Jodi Sonnenahalli Village, Bengaluru presently in Ward No.115, Vannarpet, bearing EPID No.69-44-20/02, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2221 WP No. 494 of 2026 initially belonged to Smt. Raichal Prameela, from whom the petitioners purchased the said property on 16.07.2025. The said vendor had indicated that she had obtained a plan sanction bearing L.P.No.82/2017-2018 on 21.12.2017 and had made an application for renewal thereof on 21.12.2024 assuming that the said renewal has been sanctioned, the petitioners had commenced construction. When the petitioners received a notice on 13.11.2025 from respondent No.2 calling upon the petitioners to furnish the property documents as also the plan sanction, which were also submitted by the petitioners on 16.12.2025. By way of the impugned notice/order dated 24.12.2025, respondent No.2 informed the petitioners that the plan sanction which had earlier been granted has expired on 20.12.2019 and as such, there is no plan sanction which is in existence and no construction could be carried by the petitioners. Is in that background, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Having heard both the counsel and perused the papers, it is clear that there was indeed a plan sanction which had - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2221 WP No. 494 of 2026 been granted in favour of the vendor of the petitioners as afore indicated. However, the plan being in force for a period of two years expired on 20.12.2019, an application for renewal was filed on 21.12.2024 as regards which no orders have been passed till date. 5. In that view of the matter, when an application for renewal of the plan sanction is pending, I am of the considered opinion that the respondents could not have taken action by calling upon the petitioners to stop construction and/or take any coercive steps and furtherance thereof. Interest of justice would be served by directing the respondents to consider the application, which has been filed by the vendor of the petitioners as regards the subject property, which shall enure to the benefit of the petitioners. The petitioners now being the owners of the property, and until such consideration of the application, the petitioners are restrained from putting up any construction. As such, I pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2221 WP No. 494 of 2026 ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) The notice dated 24.12.2025 bearing No.Sa.Ka.Aa/Do.U/No/2025-26/321 issued by respondent No.2 at Annexure-P is quashed. iii) A mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the application of the petitioners dated 21.12.2024 at Annexure-N within a period of 60 days in accordance with law. iv) Until then, the petitioners shall not carry on any construction. In the event of plan sanction being granted, then the petitioners would be permitted to carry on the construction as per the plan sanction granted. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11