IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3299 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI KRISHNA INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL

3^RD AND 4^TH CROSS, LAKSHMAN NAGAR, OPP: MOHAN THEATRE, HEGGANAHALLI CROSS, BANGALORE-560 091.

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2. SRI. KRISHNA SWAMY RAJU S.

S/O LATE SHAMANNA H., AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT NO.27, PARK ROAD, NEAR SRINIVASA HOSPITAL, TULASI THOTAM, BANGALORE - 53.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRIKANTH M.P., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SUMA 1. THE COMMISSIONER Location: BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HIGH COURT OF N.R. SQUARE, KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 002.

2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002.

3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HEGGANAHALLI SUB-DIVISION, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, DASARAHALLI RANGE, NEAR INDIRA CANTEEN, 1^ST CROSS, SRIGANDHANAGARA MAIN ROAD, SRIGANDHANAGARA, BENGALURU- 560 091.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE BEARING NO.SA.KA.AA./HE.HU.VI./PI.R./70/2024-25 DATED 05.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners have challenged a notice bearing No.¸ÀPÁC/ºÉG«/¦Dgï/70/2024-25 dated 05.12.2024 issued by the respondent No.3. The petitioners have also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.3 to drop all further proceedings pursuant to the aforesaid notice dated

05.12.2024.

2. (i) The petitioners claim that the petitioner No.2 is the owner of the sites bearing Nos.11, 12, 15 and 16 carved out of Assessment No.17/3, Hegganahalli, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, lying within the limits of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike. The petitioners claim that sites mentioned above were part of the private layout and there are similar other properties in the vicinity. The petitioners claim that since the sites were revenue properties, they were not provided with a sanctioned plan and hence, construction put up by them is in accordance with the relevant building byelaws. The building is leased in favour of M/s. Shri Nimishamba Devi Educational Society (R) for a period of 30 years.

(ii) The petitioners contend that the petitioner No.2 was issued with a notice dated 05.12.2024 under Section 313 of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (henceforth referred to as 'BBMP Act, 2020') calling upon him to furnish documents such as khata, sanctioned plan, commencement certificate etc., within three days from the date of receipt of a notice. The petitioners submitted a representation on 09.12.2024 and requested for more time to verify the documents and produce them. Later, petitioner No.1 submitted a representation dated 03.01.2025 to the respondent No.3 and informed him that the property tax is paid by the petitioner No.2 and that power under Section 313 of BBMP Act, 2020 cannot be delegated to any other authority. It was also brought to the notice of respondent No.3 that even though tax was collected, it had not issued khata and had not sanctioned building plan on the ground that the property was entered in the 'B' register.

(iii) The petitioners being aggrieved by the notice dated

05.12.2024 are before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that under Section 74 of the BBMP Act, 2020, there is a provision for delegation of powers. He submits that a notice under Section 313 of the BBMP Act, 2020, has to be issued by the Zonal Commissioner and no rules are framed to delegate the powers of the Zonal Commissioner to the respondent No.3. He thus contends that the impugned notice issued by the respondent No.3 is without authority of law and therefore, prays that the notice be quashed.

4. The learned counsel for the