ANDHRA PRADESH -516 396 v. (BY SRI.PAWAN KUMAR.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The writ petition is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
MR GANGAMMA GARI VIJAYAKUMAR REDDY S/O. SRI. RAVICHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.6-103A KOMMANUTHALA VILLAGE, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH -516 396. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPATH A.,ADVOCATE) AND:
CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, WHITEFIELD SUB-DIVISION, MAHADEVAPURA ZONE, BESIDE GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, HIMMADI HALLI, BENGALURU-560 066.
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BESCOM EAST SUB-DIVISION NO.4, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU 560 036 (BY SRI.PAWAN KUMAR.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2) …RESPONDENTS RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:2676 WP No. 920 of 2026 HC-KAR THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE PROVISIONAL ORDER DTD. 16.06.2025 PASSED UNDER SECTION 248(1) OF THE BBMP ACT, 2020 BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNX-C AND THE CONFIRMATION ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 248(3) OF THE BBMP ACT, 2000 DATED 1.7.2025 BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER
1. Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for following reliefs: i) ii) the Provisional Order dated Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Paa 16-06-2025B.No.Bru. /Sa.Kaa. Aa/Vy.V.O/19/2025-26, passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act, 2020, by the Respondent No. 2 vide Annexure-C. Bem. Ma. Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the Confirmation Order passed under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act 2020 01-07-2025 No.Bru. Bem. Ma.Paa/ Sa.Kaa. Aa/Vy.V.A/ 19/2025-26, by the Respondent No.2 vide Annexure-E. - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:2676 WP No. 920 of 2026 HC-KAR iii) iv) Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent no.3 to restore and provide power supply to schedule property. Pass such other order or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the above case, in the interest of Justice and Equity.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 came into force on 14.05.2025, the notice under sub- section (1) of Section-248 of the BBMP Act, 2020 has been issued on 16.06.2025, which could not have been so done since the said Act has stood repealed by the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024.
This issue has been dealt by this Court vis-a-vis the erstwhile Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'KMC Act, 1976) and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'BBMP Act, 2020') in the case of Dr.N. Gnanamurthy and another -vs- The - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:2676 WP No. 920 of 2026 HC-KAR Commissioner and others1 and this Court has categorically come to a conclusion that once the BBMP Act, 2020 has come into force, powers under sub-section (1) of Section 321 of the KMC Act, 1976 could not be resorted to. Similar would be the situation in the present matter. Once the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 has come into force, the exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 248 of the BBMP Act, 2020 could not be resorted to.
In that view of the matter, I pass the following:
Operative part
O R D E R i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) A certiorari is issued, the provisional order dated
16.6.2025 passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act, 2020 by the Respondent No.2 at Annexure-C and the confirmatory order dated
1.7.2025 passed by Respondent No.2 at Annexure-E, are quashed. 1 W.P.NO.26789/2023(LB-BMP) decided on 4th December 2023 - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:2676 WP No. 920 of 2026 HC-KAR iii) Respondents would always be at liberty to issue fresh notices under the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024. . GSS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11 SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024; Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976; Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020; Once the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.