Sri v Dwarakanath Vs the Assistant Executive… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri v Dwarakanath Vs the Assistant Executive… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim protection: the impugned orders were not to be given effect to pending the BBMP's decision, within two months, on the petitioners' application for modification of the approved plan; upon approval of the modified plan, the impugned orders would automatically stand superceded. Writ petition disposed of with these observations.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 28.1.2012 passed by Respondent No.1, the Assistant Executive Engineer, Basavanagudi Sub-Division, as confirmed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in Appeal No.220/2012 (order dated 29.2.2016), ought to be set aside. +1 more

Court's answer

Until the BBMP takes a decision on the modification application, the impugned orders shall not be given effect to.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the petitioners' submission that the defects stood rectified, the Court considered it appropriate to direct the petitioners to file an application seeking modification of the approved plan.

Key takeaways

If such an application for modification of the approved plan is filed, the BBMP shall consider the same within two months and pass appropriate orders.ratio¶26
If the BBMP approves the modified plan, the impugned orders shall automatically stand superceded.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (LB-BMP) No. 36711 of 2016, decided 22.01.2025 by Justice N S Sanjay Gowda, High Court of Karnataka — The petitioners, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, challenged the order dated 28.1.2012 of the Assistant Executive Engineer, Basavanagudi Sub-Division, BBMP (Annexure-A) passed under Section 443(A) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, as confirmed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in Appeal No.220/2012 by its order dated 29.2.2016 dismissing the petitioners' appeal. During the pendency of the writ petition the Court ordered a BBMP inspection; the petitioners filed an affidavit on 2.11.2023 undertaking to remove the deviations pointed out, and later objected to the inspection report asserting that the defects had been rectified, the deviations were within permissible limits and they were eligible for seeking regularization. The Court directed the petitioners to file an application seeking modification of the approved plan; the BBMP was to consider such application within two months and pass appropriate orders; until then the impugned orders were not to be given effect to, and if the modified plan were approved, the impugned orders would automatically stand superceded. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2749 WP No. 36711 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

WRIT PETITION NO. 36711 OF 2016 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

Digitally signed by SUMITHRA R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI V DWARAKANATH S/O V LAKSHMINARAYANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

SMT V ANITHA DWARAKANATH W/O SRI V DWARAKANATH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.212, 10^TH MAIN, NAGENDRA BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 050 …PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. KARTHIK, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. PRASHANTHI A L., ADVOCATE) AND:

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BASAVANAGUDI SUB DIVISION, WARD NO.154, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU-560 050

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. N R JAGADEESHWARA, ADVOCATE)

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2749 WP No. 36711 of 2016

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPEAL NO.220/2012 DTD 29.2.2016 DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN UNDER SECTION 443(A) OF THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT CHALLENGING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 ASSITANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BASAVANAGUDI SUB-DIVISION, BANAGLORE DTD 28.1.2012 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed challenging the Confirmatory

Order which has been confirmed in appeal.

During the pendency of this writ petition, an inspection was ordered to be conducted by this Court and the BBMP conducted inspection and filed a report. The petitioners have also filed an affidavit on 2.11.2023 to the effect that he would remove the deviations pointed out. Subsequently, they have also filed objections to the inspection report stating that they have rectified the defects pointed out and the deviations are now within the

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2749 WP No. 36711 of 2016

permissible limits and the petitioners would also be eligible

for seeking regularization.

In the light of the said submission, in my view, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioners to file an application seeking for modification of the approved plan and If such an application is filed, the BBMP shall consider the same within two months and pass appropriate orders. Until then, the impugned orders shall not be given effect to. If the BBMP were to approve the modified plan, it is needless to state that the impugned orders shall automatically stand superceded.

With the above said observations, writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47