Disposed¶58

Smt D Bhagyalakshmi v. the Commissioner

Karnataka HC25 Mar 2026WP/38475/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Unauthorized construction — direction to BBMP/Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) to remove construction violative of building bye-laws and sanctioned plan; inspection of petitioners' own property also ordered; respondent No.5 (Sri. A Krishna); four-month timeline; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; writ petition disposed; Kodihalli, Bengaluru; Karnataka High Court; M.I. Arun, J.; 2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to respondent Nos.1 to 4 to (i) inspect the petitioners' property and take appropriate action in accordance with law if it violates the sanctioned plan/building bye-laws, and (ii) take appropriate action in the manner known to law to remove the illegal/unauthorized construction of respondent No.5; the entire exercise to be completed within four months. Pending I.As., if any, disposed of.

Smt D Bhagyalakshmi Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶58

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent Nos.1 to 4 (BBMP/GBA) are to be directed to initiate appropriate action against the building constructed by respondent No.5, alleged to have been put up in violation of the building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan. +1 more

¶39

Court's answer

No person has the right to put up construction in violation of building bye-laws and sanctions; where such construction is erected, it is the duty of the authority concerned to initiate appropriate proceedings against the erring persons and remove the construction which is in violation of the law.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

Respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to inspect the petitioners' property as well and, if it is found to be in violation of the sanctioned plan and building bye-laws, take appropriate action in accordance with law to have the same removed.

¶51

Key takeaways

Respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to take appropriate action, in the manner known to law, to remove the illegal/unauthorized construction put up by respondent No.5.ratio¶52
The inspection and removal exercise directed against the petitioners' property and respondent No.5's construction shall be completed within four months from the date of the order.ratio¶57

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (M.I. Arun, J.), Writ Petition No. 38475 of 2025 (LB-BMP), disposed of on 25-03-2026. Three residents of Kodihalli, Bengaluru sought a writ under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution directing BBMP (now the Greater Bengaluru Authority) to act on their letters dated 04.11.2025, 20.11.2025 and 08.12.2025 concerning construction by respondent No.5 alleged to violate building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan. Counsel for BBMP/GBA stated on instructions that inspection of respondent No.5's property revealed violations and action would be initiated; respondent No.5 contended the petitioners' construction was also unauthorised. Held: no person has the right to put up construction in violation of building bye-laws and sanctions, and the authority concerned must initiate appropriate proceedings against erring persons and remove violative construction. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 were directed to inspect the petitioners' property and act if it violates the sanctioned plan/bye-laws, and to take appropriate action in the manner known to law to remove respondent No.5's illegal/unauthorised construction, completing the exercise within four (04) months. Petition disposed of; pending I.As. disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:16968 WP No. 38475 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 38475 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT.D.BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O DAMODHARAN AGED 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.56, 13^TH MAIN 6^TH CROSS, KODIHALLI BENGALURU-560 008.

¶9

SMT. MAHALAKSHMI W/O. LATE L. RANGARAJ AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.564, 13^TH MAIN 5^TH CROSS, H.A.L. 3^RD STAGE KODIHALLI BENGALURU 560 008.

¶10

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SMT. SHANTHI S W/O. L.SURYA RAJU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.564/1, 13^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS,

¶12

H.A.L. 3^RD STAGE KODIHALLI

¶13

BENGALURU - 560 008.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. BHUVANENDRA RAJU P AND SRI.P.B.RAJU.,ADVOCATE(ABSENT))

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:16968 WP No. 38475 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AND:

¶20

THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALLIKE N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 037

¶21

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER EAST ZONE JEEVAN BHEEMANAGAR SUB DIVISION BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALLIKE BENGALURU-560 038.

¶22

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JEEVAN BHEEMANAGAR SUB DIVISION BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALLIKE BENGALURU-560 038.

¶23

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JEEVAN BHEEMANAGAR SUB DIVISION BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALLIKE BENGALURU - 560 038.

¶24

SRI. A KRISHNA MAJOR IN AGE FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS RESIDING AT NO. 11, KODIHALLI MAIN ROAD 4TH CROSS, H.A.L. 3RD STAGE BENGALURU 560 008. ALSO AT, NO. 55, 6TH CROSS, KODIHALLI MAIN ROAD JEEVAN BHEEMANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 0084.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:16968 WP No. 38475 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

(BY SRI. VAIBHAV RAVI MALIMATH.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SRI.K.K.VASANTH., ADVOCATE FOR R5;)

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE LETTER DATED 04.11.2025 ISSUED TO RESPONDENT NO.4 AT ANNEXURES-A AND A1, LETTERS DATED 20.11.2025 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.4 AT ANNEXURES-B, B1 AND B2 AND LETTERS DATED 08.12.2025 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AT ANNEXURES-C, C1 AND C2.

¶31

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶32

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

The writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct the respondent - Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short, 'the BBMP') now, the Greater Bengaluru Authority (for short, 'the GBA) to initiate appropriate action against

¶35

the building constructed by respondent No.5, on the

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:16968 WP No. 38475 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

ground that the same has been put up in violation of the building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan.

¶40

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent – BBMP / GBA, upon instructions, submits that the property of respondent No.5 has been inspected and it has been found that the construction is in violation of the

¶41

building bye-laws and the sanctioned plan, and that they would initiate appropriate action against respondent No.5.

¶42

The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 submits that not only his property is constructed in violation of law, even the petitioners have put up the construction in violation of law.

¶43

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent – BBMP / GBA submits that the property of the petitioners will also be inspected, and if it is found to be in violation of law, appropriate action will be initiated against the petitioners as well.

¶44

The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:16968 WP No. 38475 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

No person has the right to put up construction

¶48

in violation of building bye-laws and sanctions. If such a construction is erected it is the duty of the authority concerned to initiate appropriate proceedings against the erring persons and remove the construction which is in violation of the law.

¶49

Hence, the following:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

i. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to inspect the property of the petitioners also and if it is found to be in violation of sanctioned plan and the building bye-laws, take appropriate action in accordance with law to have the same removed.

¶52