Disposed¶48

Smt. Renuka Kamasetty, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Apr 2026WP/9793/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BESCOM electricity disconnection notice; KIADB NOC demand within seven days; notice treated as show cause notice; objections within two weeks; no coercive steps or disconnection till appropriate order; writ disposed under Articles 226 and 227; follows Suresh R., W.P.No.8047/2025 and connected WPs (DD 11.03.2026); petitioner Smt. Renuka Kamasetty; Doddanekundi Phase I Industrial Area; RR No.E12TPM-2463.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file objections to the impugned notice within two weeks; impugned notice to be treated as show cause notice, with the competent authority to consider the objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; respondents restrained from taking coercive steps, including disconnection of electricity, till such consideration; all contentions kept open. ¶48

Smt. Renuka Kamasetty, Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 20.11.2025 issued by respondent No.3-BESCOM (Annexure-F), calling upon the petitioner to obtain a NOC from KIADB within seven days failing which power supply would be disconnected, should be quashed and power supply restored to RR No.E12TPM-2463.

¶30

Court's answer

The impugned notice issued by BESCOM essentially indicates an action of disconnection of electricity in the event of failure to obtain NOC certificate from the KIADB.

¶43

Ratio / Principle

No distinguishing circumstances having been demonstrated, the present petitioner is to be treated like similarly placed persons whose notices were permitted to be answered by treating them as show cause notices.

¶44

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to file objections to the impugned notice issued by respondent No.3-BESCOM within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.ratio¶49
The impugned notice shall be treated as a show cause notice and the competent authority shall consider the objections filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.ratio¶50

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-KEB) disposed of by the High Court of Karnataka (K.S. Hemalekha, J.), following the Court's earlier decision in Suresh R. (W.P.No.8047/2025 and connected WPs, DD 11.03.2026): the BESCOM notice dated 20.11.2025 (Annexure-F) demanding a KIADB NOC within seven days on pain of disconnection of supply to RR E12TPM-2463 is to be treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner may file objections within two weeks; the competent authority is to consider the objections and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; until then no coercive steps, including disconnection, are to be taken; all contentions kept open. The Court noted that no provisional or final KIADB determination of violation of the sanctioned plan existed.

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 9793 OF 2026 (GM-KEB)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. RENUKA KAMASETTY, W/O LATE BALACHANDRUDU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, SITE NO.9D, PLOT NO.9, KHATA NO.300/63, DODDANEKKUNDI PHASE I, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560 066.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI PAVAN M., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER-2, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NO.14/3, 2^ND FLOOR, C F C BUILDING, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC), EAST 12^TH SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

HC-KAR

MAHADEVAPUR,

BENGALURU-560 048.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI H.N. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI K.S.N. RAJESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 20.11.2025 IN NO.Sa.Ka.Em(A)/Sa.Em(Tha)/Pu-12/202526/1764-68 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F, AND DIRECT THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO FORTHWITH RESTORE THE POWER SUPPLY TO RR NO.E12TPM-2463.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

It is submitted that Sri K.S.N.Rajesh, learned counsel, has filed vakalath for respondent No.3.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶29

HCGP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶30

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the notice dated 20.11.2025 issued by respondent No.3-BESCOM (Annexure-F) and for

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

consequential direction to restore power supply to RR E12TPM-2463.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶35

the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Suresh R., Vs. State of Karnataka and Others¹ (Suresh R.,) wherein, similar notices were directed to be treated as show cause notices and liberty was granted to submit objections before the competent authority.

¶36

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 does not dispute that the similar matters have been disposed of by this Court by directing the impugned notices to be treated as show cause notices, enabling the affected parties to submit their objections before the competent authority.

¶37

It is evident that the impugned notice has been

¶38

issued by the BESCOM to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to obtain No Objection Certificate (NOC) from

¶39

1 W.P.No.8047/2025 and connected WPs D.D 11.03.2026

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

KIADB within seven (7) days, failing which the power supply would be disconnected. The notice is issued on the basis of the communication issued by the KIADB, alleging that the constructions undertaken by the petitioner is contrary to the sanctioned plan. However, no provisional

¶43

or final determination has been passed by the KIADB, holding that the petitioner has violated the sanctioned plan. Be it as it may, the impugned notice issued by the BESCOM essentially indicates an action of disconnection of electricity in the event of failure to obtain NOC certificate from the KIADB.

¶44

In respect of similarly placed persons, this Court has permitted the affected parties to file their objections by treating such notices as show cause notices. No distinguishing circumstances have been demonstrated to treat the present petitioner differently. In view of the above, this Court pass the following:

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

ORDER

¶48

i. The writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶49

a. The petitioner is at liberty to file his objections to the impugned notice issued by respondent No.3-BESCOM within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶50

b. The impugned notice shall be treated as show cause notice and the competent authority shall consider the objections filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶51

c. Till consideration of the objections and passing of appropriate order, the respondents shall not take any coercive steps, including disconnection of electricity to the petitioner's property.

¶52

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:20267 WP No. 9793 of 2026

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

d. All the contentions of the parties are kept

¶56

open.

¶57

Sri K.S.N.Rajesh, learned counsel, is permitted to file

¶58