Disposed

Sri Mruthyunjaya v. the Commissioner Bbmp

Karnataka HC15 Jul 2025WP/16019/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a provisional order under Section 248 of the BBMP Act, 2020. The High Court held the challenge premature and not maintainable, disposed of the petition reserving liberty to avail remedies against the final order, and directed BBMP not to give effect to the impugned order for one week.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty reserved to challenge the final order; BBMP restrained from giving effect to the impugned order for one week.

Sri Mruthyunjaya Vs the Commissioner Bbmp — Municipal and Town Planning | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:26149 WP No. 16019 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 16019 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. MRUTHYUNJAYA S/O LINGAPPA .C AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NO. 3336/3024/36/4 9th CROSS, BEHIND RELIANCE MART SHIVANAPALYA ROAD, WARD NO. 32 KENGERI, BENGALURU - 560060.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. RUDRAPPA .P, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, BBMP OFFICE HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR ZONE, BBMP BENGALURU - 560098.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO. VA AA(RARANAVA/P.R/27/2025-26 DATED 13.05.2025 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:26149 WP No. 16019 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner assailing the provisional order passed under Section 248(1) and (2) of the BBMP Act, 2020 (for short "the Act") has filed the captioned petition.

¶25

This Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner has sought to assail the provisional order issued under Section 248(3) of the Act by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, the said challenge is premature and untenable. Despite having adequate opportunity to obtain a copy of the provisional order, if the same had not been served, the petitioner has chosen to bypass the statutory remedy and directly approach this Court. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise its writ jurisdiction at this stage.

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:26149 WP No. 16019 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Accordingly, while reserving liberty to the

¶29

petitioner to avail appropriate remedies against the final order passed under Section 248(3) of the Act, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶30

Nevertheless, it is directed that the respondent-

¶31

BBMP shall not give effect to the impugned order for a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified

¶32

copy of this order.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶35

ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 68

Sri Mruthyunjaya v. the Commissioner Bbmp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mruthyunjaya v. the Commissioner Bbmp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Devaraju G Vs the State of Karnataka

Malatesh Murthy Vs the Secretary

Arumugam Mythili Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Kalegowda D S Vs Chief Excutive Officer

Mr.D.Purushothama Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Hemalatha Vs the State of Karnataka