IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 36355 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

SRI. DILIP G JAIN, S/O LATE C. GOUTAMCHAND JAIN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.11, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPETE, BENGALURU-560 018 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H.S. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BBMP (NOW RENAMED AS GBA)

HAVING OFFICE AT:

NR SQUARE, BENGALURU -560 001.

Digitally signed by 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER, SUMA CENTRAL ZONE, Location: BBMP (NOW RENAMED AS GBA), HIGH COURT OF HAVING OFFICE AT:

KARNATAKA NR SQUARE, BENGALURU -560 001.

3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CHAMARAJAPET SUB-DIVISION, BBMP (NOW RENAMED AS GBA)

BENGALURU -560 018 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROVISIONAL ORDER BEARING NO. BBMP/VA. AA/PA. VA VA/PR/69/24-25, DATED 27.03.2025, NOTICE BEARING NO.BBMP/VA. AA/ PA. VA VA/PR/69/24-25, DATED 27.03.2025, CONFIRMATORY ORDER BEARING NO.BBMP/VA. AA/PA. VA VA/PR/69/25-26, DATED 27.06.2025, BUT SERVED ON 27.11.2025, ALL PASSED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT HEREIN, VIDE ANNEXURE A TO C AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has challenged a provisional order bearing No.©©JA¦/ªÀ.D(¥À)/¦Dgï/69/24-25 dated 27/03/2025 passed by the respondent No.2 and a confirmation order bearing No.©©JA¦/ªÀ.D/ªÀ.ªÀ/¦Dgï/69/25-26 dated 27/06/2025 passed by the respondent No.2 as well as a notice bearing No.©©JA¦/ªÀ.D/ªÀ.ªÀ/¦Dgï/69/24-25 dated 27.03.2025 issued by the respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner contends that he is the owner of the property bearing khata No.11, PID No.46-5-11, old No.5, 3^rd Main Road, Chamarajpet, Ward No.46, Bengaluru-560 018.

He obtained a plan and a licence to construct the stilt, ground, first, second and third floors. He claims that he has put up construction according to the sanctioned plan and that there are no deviations. Nonetheless, the respondent No.2 issued a provisional order under Section 248(1) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short, ‘the BBMP Act, 2020’) and a notice under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020. The petitioner met the officials of the respondent – Greater Bengaluru Authority and submitted a reply claiming that he had not violated the sanctioned plan and requested the respondents to conduct a spot inspection and measure the building in his presence. The petitioner claims that a final/confirmation order was not passed by the respondent No.2 and it was not served on him. However, when respondent Nos.1 to 3 communicated to the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (‘BESCOM’ for short) about the provisional order and in view of the same, Superintending Engineer (Ele.), BESCOM, West Circle, addressed a communication dated 24.09.2025 to the petitioner in continuation of the earlier communication dated 14.02.2025, the petitioner was requested to contact the jurisdictional planning authority / local authorities and obtain the Occupancy Certificate for his building and produce it before the said Authority for release of power connection. The petitioner claims that the building is now fully constructed and people are residing therein. In view of the threat of disconnection of electricity supply, he filed W.P. No.33199/2025 and this Court in terms of an order dated 05.11.2025, directed respondent Nos.5 and 6 therein not to disconnect the electricity supply to the petitioner's schedule property or take any further action pursuant to the notice dated 24.09.2025, till the next date of hearing. The petitioner claims that he was under the impression that the final order would be passed by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (‘BBMP’ for short) by considering his objections. When the officials of the respondent No.3 visited the building of the petitioner on 27.11.2025 and s