Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Sanjana Dassani, Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Sanjana Dassani, Vs the CommissionerSanjana Dassani, v. the Commissioner

Dismissed¶32

Sanjana Dassani, v. the Commissioner

Karnataka HC15 Jan 2025WP/35740/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru, WP No. 35740 of 2024 (LB-BMP), N S Sanjay Gowda J, order dated 15-01-2025: petitioner challenged BBMP notice under S.248(2) BBMP Act 2020 (No. AEE/HBR/W-NO.76/P.O/12/24-25 dated 29/07/2024, Annexure-G) issued after provisional order under S.248(1) (Annexure-F) treating her construction as illegal. Court held that objections to the provisional order are the proper avenue and the consequential notice cannot be challenged at this stage; petitioner directed to file objections raising all lawful contentions, BBMP to consider and pass appropriate orders; writ petition dismissed with seven days to file objections. Respondent No.3 (petitioner's husband) was a formal party served with the notice by BBMP.

What did the court decide?

Seven days' time from the date of the order (15-01-2025) granted to the petitioner to file objections to the impugned notice.

Why is it important?

As the petitioner had only been called upon to file objections to the provisional order passed against her, she cannot approach this Court contending that the consequential notice is illegal. ¶30

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Seven days' time from the date of the order (15-01-2025) granted to the petitioner to file objections to the impugned notice.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice issued under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020 by the Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Sub-Division, BBMP (Annexure-G), consequent to the provisional order passed under Section 248(1), is illegal and liable to be quashed.

Court's answer

As the petitioner had only been called upon to file objections to the provisional order passed against her, she cannot approach this Court contending that the consequential notice is illegal.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner must necessarily file her objections raising all contentions available to her in law, and the BBMP must consider the same and pass appropriate orders.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (LB-BMP) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking quashing of notice No. AEE/HBR/W-NO.76/P.O/12/24-25 dated 29/07/2024 issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Sub-Division, BBMP under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020, following a provisional order under Section 248(1) (Annexure-F) recording BBMP's view that the petitioner's construction was illegal. Held: the petitioner, having been called upon only to file objections to the provisional order, cannot contend before this Court that the consequential notice is illegal; she must file objections raising all contentions available in law and the BBMP must consider them and pass appropriate orders. Writ petition dismissed; seven days granted from the date of the order to file objections to the impugned notice. (N S Sanjay Gowda, J.)

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1352 WP No. 35740 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 35740 OF 2024 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

SANJANA DASSANI, W/O. BHASKAR DASSANI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 30, BETHANY ROSY COTTAGE 3RD CROSS, HENNUR MAIN ROAD, LINGARAJAPURAM, BENGALURU-560 084.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P S RAJENDER., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, NO. 1, N.R.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002.

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HBR LAYOUT (SUB-DIVISION), 5TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE -560 043.

MR. BHASKAR DASSANI, S/O. LATE SAMPAT RAY DASSANI, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 30, BETHANY ROSY COTTAGE, 3RD CROSS, HENNUR MAIN ROAD, LINGARAJAPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 084. (RESPONDENT NO.3, IS A FORMAL PARTY TO WHOM

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1352 WP No. 35740 of 2024

THE IMPUGNED NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED BY BBMP)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SUMANGALA GURUDEV GACHCHINAMATH., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R2 I.E. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HBR SUB-DIVISION, BBMP, BEARING NO. AEE/HBR/W-NO.76/P.O/12/24-25, ON 29/07/2024, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G, ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is challenging the notice issued under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020.

A perusal of Annexure – F the provisional order, passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act indicates that the BBMP is of the view that the construction put up by the petitioner is illegal and, therefore, it has passed the provisional order. The provisional order is furnished to the petitioner as required under Section 248(2) and the petitioner is

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:1352 WP No. 35740 of 2024

directed to furnish his objections, if any, within seven days.

In my view, in the light of the fact that the petitioner is only been called upon to file his objections to the provisional order passed against him, he cannot approach this Court contending that the consequential notice is illegal.

The petitioner would have to necessarily file his objections raising all such contentions which are available to him in law and the BBMP will have to consider the same and then pass appropriate orders.

Subject to the above, this writ petition is dismissed .

The petitioner is granted seven days time from today to file his objections to the impugned notice.

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

GSR

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the notice issued under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020 by the Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Sub-Division, BBMP (Annexure-G), consequent to the provisional order passed under Section 248(1), is illegal and liable to be quashed.¶25
The court held
As the petitioner had only been called upon to file objections to the provisional order passed against her, she cannot approach this Court contending that the consequential notice is illegal.ratio¶30

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

BBMP Act, 2020248(2)¶25
BBMP Act248(1)¶26
Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227¶21

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Notice bearing No. AEE/HBR/W-NO.76/P.O/12/24-25 dated 29/07/2024 issued by R-2, the Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Sub-Division, BBMP, under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020 (Annexure-G), sought to be quashed.¶21
Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Layout (Sub-Division), BBMP · 29/07/2024
Prior proceeding
Provisional order passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act (Annexure-F), reflecting BBMP's view that the construction put up by the petitioner is illegal.¶26
Prior proceeding
Provisional order furnished to the petitioner as required under Section 248(2); petitioner directed to furnish objections, if any, within seven days.¶29

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
SANJANA DASSANI¶8
P S RAJENDER
respondent
THE COMMISSIONER BBMP¶12
SUMANGALA GURUDEV GACHCHINAMATH
respondent
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HBR LAYOUT (SUB-DIVISION)¶14
SUMANGALA GURUDEV GACHCHINAMATH
respondent
BHASKAR DASSANI¶15

Coram

AI extract

N S SANJAY GOWDAauthor¶23

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 15 Jan 2025 · January
Registered: 30 Dec 2024
Case no.: WP/35740/2024
CNR: KAHC010728762024
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: WRIT PETITION

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from N S Sanjay Gowda

C Nagaraju Alias H C N Wodeyar Vs Commissioner
13 Jan 2025
Sri Hanumanthappa Vs Principal Secretary
13 Jan 2025
Sri. Mohammed Rafiz Vs Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
13 Jan 2025
Vhbcs Layout Residents Welfare Association Vs State of Karnataka
15 Jan 2025
Sri Kaveerappa @ Munukaverappa Vs the State of Karnataka
15 Jan 2025
K M Mahadeva Vs the State of Karnataka
15 Jan 2025

Cite this judgement

Sanjana Dassani, v. the Commissioner, WP/35740/2024 (KA), decided on 15 January 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

BBMP Act, 2020248(2)
BBMP Act248(1)
Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Notice bearing No. AEE/HBR/W-NO.76/P.O/12/24-25 dated 29/07/2024 issued by R-2, the Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Sub-Division, BBMP, under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act, 2020 (Annexure-G), sought to be quashed.Assistant Executive Engineer, HBR Layout (Sub-Division), BBMP · 29/07/2024
Provisional order passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act (Annexure-F), reflecting BBMP's view that the construction put up by the petitioner is illegal.
Provisional order furnished to the petitioner as required under Section 248(2); petitioner directed to furnish objections, if any, within seven days.

View full history

Bench / Coram

N S SANJAY GOWDA

Parties & counsel