ORDER :

1. The captioned writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to issue direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take action pursuant to the final order passed under Section 321(3) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’) as per Annexure-D.

2. The facts leading to the case are as under:

The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that the respondent No. 4 who is the adjoining owner has commenced with construction illegally contrary to the sanction plan. The petitioner claims that as per the sanction plan, the respondent No. 4 is entitled to put up construction of ground floor and first floor. However, respondent No. 4 in total violation of the building sanction plan, has put up construction on ground floor plus three floors which is in contravention of the sanction plan. The petitioner immediately brought to the notice of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in regard to illegal construction made by respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 2 pursuant to the complaint, issued a notice under Section 308 of the Act. Having issued a notice under the above said Section, however, respondent No. 2 did not proceed to take further course of action and this compelled the petitioner to submit one more representation on 14.11.2018 to respondent No. 1 requesting to take appropriate action.

3. Inspite of repeated representations, it appears respondent Nos. 1 and 2 did not act on the representations and take action against the respondent No. 4. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P. No. 52928/2018 to direct the respondent No. 1 to take immediate steps as provided under Section 321 of the above said Act. The said writ petition was disposed of by recording the submissions of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 made a statement that the provisional order passed under Section 321(1) of the Act is confirmed under Section 321(3) of the Act and further course of action is contemplated by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

4. Though respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have confirmed the provisional order by invoking the provisions of Section 321(3) of the Act, however, the respondent No. 4 completed the construction and also proceeded with house warming ceremony. It is also stated that respondent No. 4 preferred an appeal in Revision Appeal No. 992/2018 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal questioning the same.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently argue and contend before this Court that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 having confirmed the provisional order as per Annexure-D was required to take further course of action as contemplated under Section 462 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976. He would also submit to this Court that the appeal preferred by the respondent No. 4 in Appeal No. 992/2018 is dismissed on 03.02.2020 and therefore, the order passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as per Annexure-D has attained finality. At this juncture, he would submit to this Court that he has sought instructions from his client and on instructions, he would submit to this Court that the respondent No. 4 till this date has not challenged the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. He would also submit to this Court that his client has not received any notice from this Court pursuant to the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and therefore, on account of gross inaction on the part of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in not taking action against the illegal construction carried out by respondent No. 4, the petitioner is before this Court seeking appropriate directions against respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 would submit to this Court that since appeal was pending before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have not given effect to the confirmation order passed under Section 321(3) of the Act. He would submit to t