This

writ

appeal

is

against

the

order

dated

20.04.2023 passed in W.P.3119/2023 (LB-BMP) by which

the writ petition filed by the appellant herein seeking

quash of notice dated 30.01.2023 issued by respondent

No.2 as per Annexure-A has been dismissed.

2. The above writ petition was filed by the

appellant claiming to be a small-scale manufacturer of

automated valves and dampers for ventilating systems

and oxygen cylinders at its factory at Pune with its

corporate office at Plot No.1106, 10^th Main, Near Hampi

Nagar Bus Stand, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru. The said

property at Bengaluru is the subject matter of writ

petition. By notice dated 30.01.2023 at Annexure-A

respondent No.2 directed the appellant to close down the

industry being run in the subject property within seven

days from the date of receipt of the notice on the premise

that the subject property is situated within the residential

area and the road width is less than 40 feet and that there

- 4 -

is no permission to use the subject property for non-

residential purpose.

3. It was contended by the appellant/petitioner in

the writ petition that the appellant being a MSME is not

required to obtain a trade licence. As such, appellant

carrying on its business of corporate office in the subject

property. That the subject property is assessed for

commercial usage and the appellant has been paying the

property taxes at commercial rate. That earlier there was

a notice issued by the respondent which was questioned

by the appellant in the writ petition in W.P.No.4562/2022

which

was

clubbed

with

another

writ

petition

in

W.P.No.8495/2022 filed by respondent No.3 herein. That

by order dated 13.12.2022 the said writ petitions were

disposed

of

directing

the

BBMP

to

consider

the

representation of the appellant and respondent No.3

herein in four weeks and to pass appropriate orders. That

the appellant had submitted representation and without

consideration of the same impugned notice at Annexure-A

- 5 -

dated 30.01.2023 has been issued constraining the

appellant to file the above writ petition.

4. Considering various grounds urged and the

material placed on record and also referring to the Zoning

Regulations learned Single Judge came to the conclusion

that the subject property is situated in the residential area

and that the appellant is carrying on the business of its

corporate office and accordingly dismissed the writ

petition. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, present

writ appeal.

5. Sri.Arun Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing

for Ms.Sanjana Rao, learned counsel for the appellant at

the

outset

submits

that

respondent

No.2

has

no

jurisdiction to issue the notice at Annexure-A inasmuch as

Revised Master Plan(RMP) and Zonal Regulations are made

under the aegis of Karnataka Town and Country Planning

Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as `KTCP Act’ for short).

That it is the Planning Authority designated under the

KTCP Act the exclusive body to enforce the terms of RMP,

- 6 -

should there be any violation of Section 14 of KTCP Act.

That since the subject property is located within the

Bangalore Urban District, it is Bangalore Development

Authority

which

is

the

Planning

Authority

having

jurisdiction over the subject property and is the relevant

authority for enforcing the terms of RMP. As such, he

submits that the notice in question issued by BBMP is

unsustainable.

Referring

to

Zonal

Regulations

for

residential areas namely 4.1.1 Residential (Main) learned

Senior counsel submits that as per the provision “C2”

Commercial

activities

are

permissible

even

in

the

residential area if commercial activities is limited to 20%

of the built up area. That since the appellant is using only

portion of the built up area for its administrative purposes

there cannot be any blanket restriction from using the

property. That the impugned order has in effect restricted

the appellant from using even 20% of the built up area

permiss