IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO. 14153 OF 2022 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

1. DR. H.T SANGALIANA COLONY RESIDENTS WELFARE

ASSOCIATION

REP BY PRESIDENT

MR S P RAJESH AGED 42 YEARS

NO 36, DR. SANGLIANA COLONY

HORAMAVU AGARA

HORAMAVU POST

BANGALORE - 560 043

…PETITIONER

(BY SMT. AVN MARY TOMY, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. NITIN A.M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA

by SHWETHA

RAGHAVENDRA REP BY CHIEF SECRETARY

Location: HIGH

VIDHANA SOUDHA

COURT OF

KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560001

2. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP)

REP BY ZONAL COMMISSIONER

MAHADEVAPURA ZONE BENGALURU - 560 002.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT CHANDINI SINGH, HCGP FOR R1

SRI. T.M. VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-ISSUE WRIT MANDATING THE R2 TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW ESTABLISHED UNDER CHAPTER XV, SUB SECTION 3 OF SECTION 233 OF THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE ACT, 2020 AND TO RESTORE THE NAME/SIGN BOARDS IN THE LAYOUT AS REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.06.2022 AT ANNEXURE-L.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

“1. To issue writ of mandamus mandating the Respondent No.2 to comply with the law established under Chapter XV, Sub-section 3 of Section 233 of The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 and to restore the name / sign boards in the layout as requested by the Petitioner in the representation dated 15.06.2022, Annexure-L.

2. Pass such other order that this Hon’ble Court deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the street leading upto the Colony of the petitioner had been named as DR.H.T.Sangaliana Road. Subsequently, the name board has been removed without any notice or any procedure been followed and hence a representation had been submitted by the petitioner on 15.06.2022 at Annexure-L, to restore the name board of the street, which is yet to be considered.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that now Greater Bengaluru Authority (‘GBA’ for short) has been informed, the same would be considered and necessary orders will be passed in accordance with law, within four weeks time from now, if a fresh representation submitted to the GBA.

4. I’am of the considered opinion that a representation having been already submitted to the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike, merely because the GBA has been formed now, there would be no requirement to submit a fresh representation. The earlier representation submitted by the petitioner to the BBMP would have to be considered by the GBA and necessary orders shall be passed in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks, as submitted by the respondent’s counsel. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. Writ petition is allowed.

ii. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 15.06.2022, at Annexure-L and pass necessary orders thereon, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

iii. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner.

SD/-

(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11