SMT. SAROJINI S v. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
Case at a glance
- Bench
- M I ARUN
- Neutral citation
- 2025:KHC:36482
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 s. 248
- Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 s. 309
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Hence the following:- ORDER i. Respondent No. 1 is directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. ii. Till appropriate orders are passed in the appeal, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 shall not precipitate the matter against the…
Judgment
(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R.1 TO R.3; SMT. ANUSHA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R.4.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROVISIONAL ORDER BEARING NO. SAM.VA.AA(POO)P.R/15/2024-25 DATED 20.12.2024 PASSED UNDER SECTION 248(1) AND THE CONFIRMATION ORDER BEARING NO.SAM.VA.AA(POO)C.O/24/2024-25 DATED
06.02.2025 PASSED UNDER SECTION 248(3) OF THE BBMP ACT, 2020, BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND B, AS BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36482 WP No. 27538 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER Order under Section 248 of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 Act (for short 'the Act') has been passed directing the petitioner to demolish the alleged illegal construction. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before respondent No.1 - Chief Commissioner, BBMP under Section 253 of the BBMP Act. However, on the ground that the appeal has not been taken up for hearing, and there are no regular sittings and on the ground that the remedy is not efficacious, the present writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- "A. Issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, against the respondent no.1 Chief commissioner, BBMP, to forthwith take up and dispose of the petitioner's statutory appeal filed under section 235(1) of the BBMP Act 2020 vide ANNEXURE-C, within a time bound period., OR / ALTERNATIVELY Issue a writ of certiorari any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the Provisional Order bearing SAM VAAA(POO)P.R/15/2024-25 dated 20.12.2024 passed under Section 248(1) the Confirmation Order bearing no. SAM.VA.AA(POO)C.O/24/2024-25 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:36482 WP No. 27538 of 2025 HC-KAR
06.02.2025 passed under Section 248(3) of the BBMP Act, 2020, by Respondent No.2 vide ANNEXURE-A & B, as being arbitrary, illegal and without Jurisdiction; B. Quash the communication bearing no. SAM.SA. KAA.PAA.AA(JEE BHI NA) P.R/167/2025-26 dated
26.06.2025 issued by Respondent No.1 BESCOM vide ANNEXURE-P and the consequential disconnection notice bearing no. AEE.AET/E6- SD/2025-26/92 dated 03.07.2025 by Respondent No.4 vide ANNEXURE-Q. C. Direct Respondent No.4 BESCOM to forthwith restore electricity supply the petitioner's property bearing No.67 (Old HLS No.154), situated at 3rd Main Road, 80 Feet Road, Old Thippasandra, Ward No.113, Bengaluru-560038, and ensure continuity of supply during the pendency of the appeal; D. Grant liberty to the Petitioner to approach the competent authority under section 309 of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024, if the need arises as and when the appellate mechanism under the said Act becomes operational and functional, for adjudication of her statutory appeal and connected interim reliefs. E. Pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including costs of this petition. " - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:36482 WP No. 27538 of 2025 HC-KAR
The learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 - BBMP upon instructions, submits that the appeal filed by the petitioner will be considered in due course.
However, taking into consideration that the building which is sought to be demolished is habitated and it was having the necessary electricity connection, I am of the opinion it would be appropriate to direct the respondents not to precipitate the matter against the petitioner and to restore the electricity till an appropriate decision is taken by respondent No.1 in the appeal said to have been filed by the petitioner.
Operative part
Hence the following:- ORDER i. Respondent No. 1 is directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. ii. Till appropriate orders are passed in the appeal, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 shall not precipitate the matter against the petitioner. iii. Respondent No. 4 shall restore power supply to the building of the petitioner subject to payment of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:36482 WP No. 27538 of 2025 HC-KAR all necessary charges and the said restoration of electricity will also be subject to the result of a decision that would be taken by respondent No.1 in the appeal said to have been filed by the petitioner. iv. It is hereby clarified that no opinion has been expressed on the merits of the case and respondent No.1 shall decide the appeal of the petitioner based on the materials produced. v. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. vi. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 — s. 248; Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 — s. 309.
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.