Mohan Singh P, Vs the Chief Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mohan Singh P, Vs the Chief Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction to the Joint Commissioner, Malleshwaram Division (R2) to extend an opportunity of personal hearing on 30.07.2026 or any other convenient date and then pass just orders as required in law; petitioner stipulated not to lay a brick in the interregnum and, subject to that condition, the authorities are to desist from taking precipitous action.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Provisional Order dated 18.03.2026 under Section 243(3)(c) of the GBG Act, 2024 could validly have been issued while proceedings arising from the earlier notice under the erstwhile Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike Act, 2020 (impugned in W.P.No.20788/2025) were pending. +1 more

Court's answer

If the petitioner can show cause against confirmation of the alleged deviations (setback, coverage of the plot, two additional floors), the petitioner can equally do so when extended the opportunity contemplated under the proviso to Section 243(d) of the GBG Act.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of calling upon the Joint Commissioner, Malleshwaram Division, Bengaluru West City Corporation, GBA to extend an opportunity of personal hearing on 30.07.2026 or any other convenient further date, and then pass just orders as would be required in law.

Key takeaways

The Court stipulates that the petitioner shall not lay a brick in the interregnum and, subject to this condition, the Authorities are called upon to desist from taking precipitous action.ratio¶¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (B M Shyam Prasad J.), by oral order dated 29.06.2026, disposed of W.P. No. 18639 of 2026 (LB-BMP), filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Provisional Order dated 18.03.2026 (No. JAM. A/MA.VA/BEM.PA.NA.PA/PR/113/2025-26, Annx-A) issued by the Joint Commissioner, Malleshwaram Division under Section 243(c)/243(3)(c) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024. Counsel argued the Order could not have been issued while proceedings on an earlier notice under the erstwhile Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike Act, 2020 — impugned in W.P.No.20788/2025, disposed of on 15.07.2025 with a direction to hear the petitioner — remained pending; the impugned Order rested on an Assistant Executive Engineer's report dated 18.03.2026 recording deviations in setback, coverage of the plot and building of two additional floors. Observing that a petitioner who can show cause against confirmation of such allegations can equally do so given the extended opportunity contemplated by the proviso to Section 243(d) of the GBG Act, the Court called upon the Joint Commissioner to extend a personal hearing on 30.07.2026 (or any convenient later date) and pass just orders as required in law, stipulating that the petitioner shall not lay a brick in the interregnum and, subject to that condition, that the authorities desist from precipitous action.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:32136 WP No. 18639 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 18639 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

MOHAN SINGH P, S/O LATE PEHAP SINGH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

SANTOSH KANWAR, W/O MOHAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

NO.28, VN08, 4TH FLOOR, VENKAT NIVAS, SUBRAMANYA LANE, AKKIPET CROSS, BANGALORE - 560053

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. ROHAN S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY, HAVING OFFICE AT NR SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560001.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:32136 WP No. 18639 of 2026

HC-KAR

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, MALLESHWARAM DIVISION, BENGALURU WEST CITY CORPORATION, GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SRI-RAM MANDIR SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU WEST CITY CORPORATION GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY,

R2 & 3 HAVING OFFICE AT NO.161, 2ND FLOOR, 26TH CROSS, 19TH MAIN, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU 560010

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR

MR. H DEVENDRAPPA., ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.03.2026 BEARING NO. JAM. A/MA.VA/BEM.PA.NA.PA/PR/113/2025-26 PASSED BY THE R2 UNDER SECTION 243(C) OF GBG ACT, 2024 VIDE ANNX-A.

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

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:32136 WP No. 18639 of 2026

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has called in question the Provisional Order dated 18.03.2026 under Section 243(3)(c) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 [for short, 'GBG Act' ]. Mr. Rohan S, the learned counsel for the petitioners, relying upon the orders of this Court on 15.07.2025 in W.P.No.20788/2025, submits that the petitioner is issued with another notice but under the erstwhile Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike Act, 2020 which is impugned in W.P.No.20788/2025 and that this Court has disposed of this petition directing the Authorities to extend an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and then pass just orders.

The learned counsel submits that when such proceedings are pending, the impugned Provisional Order could not have been issued. Mr. Pawan Kumar,

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:32136 WP No. 18639 of 2026

HC-KAR

the learned Standing counsel who accepts notice for the respondents, is heard for the disposal of the petition. It is seen from the Provisional Order that the present proceedings are based on a report filed by the Assistant Executive Engineer on 18.03.2026 which is subsequent to this Court's order in W.P.No.20788/2025. The Assistant Executive Engineer has extracted in the impugned order, the deviations in the setback, coverage of the plot and in building two additional floors.

If the petitioner can show cause against confirmation when these are the allegations, the petitioner could indeed show cause when extended with an opportunity as contemplated under the proviso to Section 243(d) of the GBG Act. This Court therefore disposes of this petition calling upon the Joint Commissioner, Malleshwaram Division, Bengaluru West City Corporation, GBA [ the second respondent ], to extend an opportunity of personal

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:32136 WP No. 18639 of 2026

HC-KAR

hearing on 30.07.2026 or any other further date as

may be convenient and then pass just orders as would be required in law. This Court stipulates that the petitioner shall not lay a brick in the interregnum and subject to this condition, the Authorities are

called upon to desist from taking precipitous action.

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

RB