##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16953 WP No. 9458 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

WRIT PETITION NO. 9458 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

SRI P.O. SHIVAKUMAR S/O OMKARAMURTHY

AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS NOW RESIDING AT MP/C-57

2^ND PARALLEL ROAD, B BLOCK GANDHI NAGAR

SHIVAMOGGA - 572 201.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI SANDESH KUMAR M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY

HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE - 560 001.

Di gitally signed by GEETHA P G 2. THE COMMISSIONER

Location: BENGALURU SOUTH CITY CORPORATION, HIGH BLOCK II, 8TH MAIN CROSS, COURT OF JAYANAGAR NAGAR,

KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 011.

3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BENGALURU SOUTH CITY CORPORATION

J.P.NAGAR SUB DIVISION, JAYANAGAR NAGAR CIRCLE, 10TH CROSS, 21^ST MAIN ROAD

J.P. NAGAR II STAGE BANGALORE - 560 078.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16953 WP No. 9458 of 2026

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN REVENUE APPEAL NO.333/2021 ANNEXURE-O, CONSEQUENTLY, ALSO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING SA.KA.NI.AA/J.P.NO/C.O./WARD.177/06/2019-20 DATED 21.10.2019

VIDE ANNEXURE-L PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

ORAL ORDER

1. On the allegation that the petitioner has put up construction in violation of the building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan, the proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by the then Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, now Greater Bengaluru Authority. It resulted in the petitioner approaching the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short 'KAT') by way of Rev.Appeal No.333/2021. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, after hearing the parties and examining the records, has come to the conclusion that the petitioner has put up construction in violation of the building bye-laws and

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16953 WP No. 9458 of 2026

HC-KAR

sanctioned plan, and hence has dismissed the appeal.

Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed.

2. In the writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the KAT in Appeal No.333/2021 and also the eviction

notices issued by the respondents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to show how the order passed by the KAT is erroneous. However, he submits that in the light of recent amendments made to the Rules in respect of set back, certain construction put up by the petitioner can be saved. He submits that the petitioner would submit a request for a modified sanctioned plan and he also undertakes that any construction put up in violation of the present existing building bye-laws, the petitioner is willing to

demolish the same.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents, upon instructions, submits that a fresh inspection will be made and that if the petitioner were to submit a request for a modified sanctioned plan, the same would be considered in accordance with law and

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16953 WP No. 9458 of 2026

HC-KAR

only thereafter, the construction put up in violation of the

present existing bye-laws will be demolished.

5. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i) Petitioner is given liberty to submit a request for a modified sanctioned plan. The said request will be made within a period of three weeks from today. If such an application is made within three weeks, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law and approve the modified sanctioned plan. Further, respondents shall also hear persons who

have complained against petitioner, if any;

(ii) Even after the grant of modified sanctioned plan, if any construction is found to be in violation of the same, the same shall be removed forthwith by the petitioner and if he fails to do so, the responde