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.

Mrs.Ashwini v Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Home
Karnataka HC
2026
Mrs.Ashwini v Vs the CommissionerMrs.Ashwini v. Vs the Commissioner

Dismissed¶38-39

Mrs.Ashwini v. Vs the Commissioner

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2026WP/35160/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC writ petition dismissed as not pressed following petitioner's withdrawal memo dated 12.02.2026; prayers were mandamus to BBMP (Commissioner, Zonal Commissioner South, Assistant Executive Engineer, Ward No.124) to consider representation dated 16.08.2025 and to demolish alleged illegal construction by private respondent M. Lokesh at Site No.2/15 (PID No.60-15-15), Byrasandra, Jayanagar 1st Block, Bengaluru; filed under Articles 226-227 Constitution of India; liberty reserved to BBMP respondents to act per law; no merits determination; useful precedent only for withdrawal-by-memo practice and preservation of statutory action post-withdrawal; Judge: Suraj Govindaraj.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted to the petitioner; the petition was dismissed as not pressed on the petitioner's own memo dated 12.02.2026, with liberty reserved to respondents No.1 to 3 to act in accordance with law.

Why is it important?

Accepting the petitioner's memo dated 12.02.2026, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed; neither prayer (consideration of the representation nor demolition of the alleged unauthorised construction) was adjudicated. ¶38-39

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted to the petitioner; the petition was dismissed as not pressed on the petitioner's own memo dated 12.02.2026, with liberty reserved to respondents No.1 to 3 to act in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No.2 to 3 (BBMP officials) can be directed by mandamus to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2025 vide Annexure-A and B in accordance with law. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Accepting the petitioner's memo dated 12.02.2026, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed; neither prayer (consideration of the representation nor demolition of the alleged unauthorised construction) was adjudicated.

Key takeaways

Liberty was expressly reserved to respondents No.1 to 3 to take such action as is permissible in accordance with law.obiter¶40-42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Suraj Govindaraj, J.), 12.02.2026 — WP No. 35160 of 2025 (LB-BMP): Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by Mrs. Ashwini V seeking (i) a mandamus directing BBMP respondents No.2 to 3 to consider her representation dated 16.08.2025 (Annexures A and B) in accordance with law, and (ii) demolition of construction allegedly put up by respondent No.4 in violation of the sanctioned plan at Site No.2/15 (PID No.60-15-15), Byrasandra, Jayanagar 1st Block, Bengaluru. Before any adjudication, the petitioner filed a memo dated 12.02.2026 expressing unwillingness to prosecute the case further and praying for dismissal as not pressed. Accepting the memo, the Court dismissed the petition as not pressed, expressly reserving to respondents No.1 to 3 liberty to take such action as is permissible in accordance with law. No issue of unauthorised construction was decided on merits.

A

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8729 WP No. 35160 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 35160 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

MRS.ASHWINI V W/O.SRI.SANTOSH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.5/19, 2ND CROSS 4TH MAIN, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK BENGALURU-560 011

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ABHIJEET.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R SQAURE BENGALURU-560 002

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER (SOUTH) BBMP, 9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN BBMP COMPLEX, JAYANAGAR 4TH BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 011

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BBMP WARD OFFICE-HOSAHALLI, WARD NO.124, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040

SRI.M.LOKESH S/O.SRI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.2/15, 2ND CROSS, 4TH MAIN BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK BENGALURU-560 011

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SATYANAND B S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.G.S.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8729 WP No. 35160 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.08.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND B RESPECTIVELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the

following reliefs;

i. Issue a Writ Of Mandamus Directing the respondent no.2 to 3 to Consider the Representation Dated 16.08.2025 vide ANNEXURE-A and B respectively in accordance with law.

ii. Issue A Writ Of Mandamus directing the respondents no.1 to 3 to demolish the illegal Construction put up in violation of Sanctioned Plan by the 4th respondent in site bearing No.2/15 (PID No.60-15-15), 2nd Cross, 8th Main, Ward No.182 (Old Ward No.169) Byrasandra Jayanagar 1st Block, Bengaluru within 4 weeks

iii. To grant such other relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including award of the cost of these proceedings, in the interest of justice and equity.

A memo dated 12.02.2026 signed by the petitioner and the counsel for the petitioner has been filed,

which reads as under;

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8729 WP No. 35160 of 2025

HC-KAR

Memo

The petitioner submits that she does not wish to prosecute the above case any further and therefore prays that the above petition be dismissed as not pressed in the ends of the justice and equity.

Accepting the said memo, the petition is dismissed

as not pressed .

Liberty is, however, reserved to respondent No.1 to 3

to take such action as is permissible in accordance

with law.

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SR

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether respondents No.2 to 3 (BBMP officials) can be directed by mandamus to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2025 vide Annexure-A and B in accordance with law.¶28
2.
Whether respondents No.1 to 3 can be directed by mandamus to demolish the construction allegedly put up by respondent No.4 in violation of the sanctioned plan at site bearing No.2/15 (PID No.60-15-15), 2nd Cross, 8th Main, Ward No.182 (Old Ward No.169), Byrasandra, Jayanagar 1st Block, Bengaluru, within 4 weeks.¶29

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226; Article 227¶22

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct respondents No.2 to 3 to consider the representation dated 16.08.2025 vide Annexure-A and B in accordance with law, and seeking demolition of allegedly illegal construction by respondent No.4.¶22
Prior proceeding
By a memo dated 12.02.2026 signed by the petitioner and her counsel, the petitioner stated she did not wish to prosecute the case further and prayed that the petition be dismissed as not pressed.¶37

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mrs. Ashwini V (W/o Sri. Santosh Kumar)¶9
Sri. Abhijeet
respondent
The Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike¶13
Sri. Satyanand B S
respondent
The Zonal Commissioner (South), BBMP¶15
Sri. Satyanand B S
respondent
The Assistant Executive Engineer, BBMP Ward Office-Hosahalli, Ward No.124¶16
Sri. Satyanand B S
respondent
Sri. M. Lokesh¶17
Sri. G.S.Ravishankar

Coram

AI extract

Suraj Govindarajauthor¶24

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 12 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 21 Nov 2025
Case no.: WP/35160/2025
CNR: KAHC010749222025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: Suraj Govindara
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Writ Petition (LB-BMP)

Similar cases

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

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Suraj Govindara

Giriraja M R Vs Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies
11 Feb 2026
Sri. Kikkeri Krishnamurthy Vs the Commissioner
11 Feb 2026
Smt. G Nitya Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
11 Feb 2026
Sri.Srinivasa, Vs the Chief Commissioner and Appellate Tribunal
12 Feb 2026
Smt a P Vilasalathika Vs State of Karnataka
12 Feb 2026
National Centre for Biological Sciences (Ncbs) Vs the Commissioner
12 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Mrs.Ashwini v. Vs the Commissioner, WP/35160/2025 (KA), decided on 12 February 2026.

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

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226; Article 227

View all statutes

Procedural history2

Petitioner filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct respondents No.2 to 3 to consider the representation dated 16.08.2025 vide Annexure-A and B in accordance with law, and seeking demolition of allegedly illegal construction by respondent No.4.
By a memo dated 12.02.2026 signed by the petitioner and her counsel, the petitioner stated she did not wish to prosecute the case further and prayed that the petition be dismissed as not pressed.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Suraj Govindaraj

Parties & counsel