K.R. PURAM v. WHITE FILED
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
(a) The writ petition is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
1. SRI JAYAKEERTHI S S/O. LATE SANJEEVARAJU M., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
2. SMT. LAKSHMISHREE S D/O. LATE SANJEEVARAJU M., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.7, 'SANGEETH', 3RD CROSS, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU NORTH - 560 036. …PETITIONERS RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. SAMPATH A, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BBMP) N.R. SQUARE, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 002.
2. THE COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY BENGALURU EAST CITY CORPORATION, WHITEFIELD SUB-DIVISION, - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:6905 WP No. 2699 of 2026 HC-KAR BESIDE GOVT. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, IMMADIHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 066.
3. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY (EAST-1) WHITEFIELD SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 066.
4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BBMP, MAHADEVAPURA ZONE, BESIDE GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE IMMADHIHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 066.
5. SMT. M. MANJULA KUMARI W/O LATE M NAGESH AGED ABOUR 55 YEARS R/AT NO.400, ASHRITHA RAMAGONDANAHALLI, WHITE FILED, BENGALURU - 560 066 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE BEARING BBMP/SAKAAAA/Y.U.V/P.R.NO.47/2025-26 DTD
21.08.2025 ISSUED BY THE R-4 UNDER SEC 313 AND 352 OF THE BBMP ACT 2020 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:6905 WP No. 2699 of 2026 HC-KAR
Sri Pawan Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice for ORAL ORDER Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (a) (b) (c) (d) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the notice bearing BBMP/SAKAAAA/Y.U.V/P.R.No.47/2025-26 dated 21- 08-2025 issued by the Respondent No.4 under Section 313 and 352 of the BBMP Act 2020 vide Annexure-A. Issue writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the bearing provisional BBMP/SAKAAAA/Y.U.V/P.R.No.61 /2025-26 dated 16-09-2025 issued by the Respondent No.3 under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act 2020 vide Annexure- B. Order Issue writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the bearing BBMP/SAKAAAA/Y.U.V/P.R.No.61 Notice /2025-26 dated 16-09-2025 Respondent No.3 under Section 248(2) of the BBMP Act 2020 vide Annexure-C. issued by Pass such other order or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems facts and circumstances of the above case, in the interest of Justice and Equity.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners 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 16.09.2025, which could not have been - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:6905 WP No. 2699 of 2026 HC-KAR 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 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: 1 W.P.NO.26789/2023(LB-BMP) - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:6905 WP No. 2699 of 2026 HC-KAR
Operative part
O R D E R
(a) The writ petition is allowed.
(b) A certiorari is issued, the provisional order dated
16.9.2025 passed under Section 248(1) of the BBMP Act, 2020 by the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 at Annexure-B is quashed. (c) Respondents would always be at liberty to issue fresh notices under the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (a) The writ petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; 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.