Due process must be followed in property demolition orders under the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act.

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has preferred Appeal No.121/2025 under Section 253 of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagaa Palike Act, 2020 before respondent no.1 against the order passed by respondent no.2 regarding the demolition of certain constructions put up by the petitioner on the property said to be owned by her. The appeal is filed on 22.04.2025. Along with the said appeal, the petitioner has also filed an application for condonation of delay as well as an application for stay of the order passed by respondent no.2. It is submitted that inspite of filing the said appeal way back on 22.04.2025 the applications filed by the petitioner have not been considered so far and consequently there is a threat of demolition of the property.

2. It is further submitted that petitioner has got a good case on merits and the fact situation does not warrant demolition of the alleged deviations as ordered by respondent no.2 and if given an opportunity, the petitioner would show the same before respondent no.1. It is further submitted that the balance of convenience lies with the petitioner and if an interim order is not granted by respondent no.1 against the order passed by respondent no.2 and if the alleged deviations are demolished, the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss. It is further submitted that after affording her an opportunity of hearing, if a decision is taken to remove the deviations, if any, petitioner is always willing to oblige the same.

3. Under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if an order is passed restraining the respondents from precipitating to the matter against the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by respondent no.2, till respondent no.1 takes a decision upon the appeal/applications filed by the petitioner.

4. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i) The respondents shall not precipitate the matter against the petitioner till a suitable decision is taken by respondent no.1 upon the Appeal No.121/2025 filed by the petitioner or on the applications filed along with the appeal.

(ii) It is hereby clarified that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case and it is for respondent no.1 to take appropriate decision in accordance with law based on the materials available before him.

(iii)The petitioner shall not put up any additional construction on the property till a decision is taken by respondent no.1 in this regard.

(iv)The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

In view of disposal of main petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.