IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34594 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAMAKRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.141, 2^ND 'D' MAIN ROAD

8^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU-560001.

2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER MAHADEVAPURA ZONE, BBMP Digitally signed by WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, SUMA BENGALURU-560066 Location:

HIGH COURT OF 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KARNATAKA WHITEFIELD SUB-DIVISION, BBMP, MAHADEVAPURA RANGE, BENGALURU-560066

4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC)

4^TH WEST SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU-560066 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3;

SRI. H.V.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO PRECIPITATE ANY COERCIVE ACTION, INCLUDING DEMOLITION OR REMOVAL OF THE FUSE / ELECTRIC METER, IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY, PENDING ADJUDICATION OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE BBMP ACT, 2020 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 sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents not to take any coercive action including demolition of the building or removal of the fuse/electric meter installed in the schedule property and to direct the respondent No.4 to restore and maintain the power supply to the petitioner's property subject to payment of consumption charges.

2. (i) The petitioner claims to be the owner of a property bearing Municipal No.3614/5-1 formed in Sy.No.5/1 situate at Ramagondanahalli village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. He contends that the property is assessed to tax by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. The petitioner claims that a structure existed on the property, which was renovated by him. He thereafter, applied for an electricity connection. He claimed that the property is now in the occupation of the tenants, who have commenced commercial activities after obtaining valid trade licence. However, the respondent No.3 issued a provisional order and notice under Sections 248(1) and 248(2) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (henceforth referred to as 'BBMP Act, 2020'). The petitioner claims that the said notice was not served on him. However, after coming to know of the same, he filed his reply. The respondent No.3 without considering the reply passed an order dated 06.03.2023 confirming the provisional order and directed the demolition of the structure and also recommended to remove the electric meter installed in the premises.

(ii) The petitioner claims that he has challenged the order passed by the respondent No.3 before the respondent No.1/Chief Commissioner under Section 253 of the BBMP Act, 2020, which is pending consideration. However, in the meanwhile, he alleges that the respondent No.4 has removed the electric meter installed in the premises. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court seeking for a direction as stated above.

3. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 fairly submitted that until the appeal pending before the respondent No.1 is considered, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 will not take any precipitative action.

4. This is however, countered by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who contends that the respondent No.4 has already taken away the electric meter installed in the premises. He therefore, prays that direction be issued to the respondent No.4 to reinstall the electric meter.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.

6. The petitioner has admitted that an orde