Karnataka High Court
WA/420/2025 of SRI AMARDEEP SINGH Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 9 June 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:27614-DB WA No. 451 of 2025 C/W WA No. 420 of 2025 WA No. 587 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 451 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT APPEAL NO. 451 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO. 420 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 587 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)
IN WA No. 451/2025
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT JAYA SYAL
W/O RAMA KANT SHARMA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO. B-105 PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE,
MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560037
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SUNIL RAO., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
BRUHATH BENGALURU MANAGARA PALIKE
BANGALORE-560002
2.
ZONAL COMMISSIONER
BRUHATH BENGALURU MANAGARA PALIKE
MAHADEVPURA ZONE
BANGALORE-560048
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B K
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
3.
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BRUHATH BENGALURU MANAGARA PALIKE
MAHADEVPURA ZONE
HOODY SUB-DIVISION, HOODY,
BANGALORE-560048
4.
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING
BRUHATH BENGALURU MANAGARA PALIKE
MAHADEVPURA ZONE,
BANGALORE- 560048
5.
MR. RAMA KANT SHARMA
S/O LATE SRI UMA KANT SHARMA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/AT NO. B-105 PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE,
MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560037
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE., ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WP No- 12011/2024 (LB-BMP) AND SET ASIDE THE DAILY ORDER
DATED 10.03.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
IN WP No-12011/2024 (LB-BMP).
IN WA NO. 420/2025
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI AMARDEEP SINGH
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
S/O PRITAM SINGH
R/AT P-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560037
2.
SRI ANKUR GUPTHA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
S/O RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA
R/AT P-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560037
HC-KAR
3.
SRI. YOGESH TAYAL
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
S/O DIWAN CHAND TAYAL
R/AT K-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
4.
SRI RAHUL GULATI
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
S/O HARISH GULATI
R/AT D-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560037
5.
SRI. PIYUSH BANSAL
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
S/O RAMESH KUMAR BANSAL
R/AT E-102, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
6.
SRI. ANKUR JAIN
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
S/O PADAM JAIN
R/ATC-102, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
7.
SMT. URVASHI CHANDIRAMANI
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
W/O GOBIND CHANDIRAMANI
R/AT E-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
8.
SMT. JUHI GARG
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
W/O VISHAD GARG
R/AT D-102 PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
9.
SMT. Y RANI HITA SHEKHAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
W/O Y SHEKHAR
R/AT F-105, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI,
HC-KAR
BENGALURU 560037
10.
SMT. SWARUPA SIKHARAM
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
W/O RAMESH BABU KUNAPAREDDY
R/AT L-102, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU 560037
11.
SRI ALOK AGARWAL
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O DR R C AGARWAL
R/AT M-102, PURVA FOUNTAIN SQUARE, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560037
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. NANDISH PATEL., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
2.
COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST,
GUTTAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560020.
3.
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EAST SUB DIVISION,
BANGALORE - 560020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3;
SRI. DATTATREYA PRABHU SHARMA FOR PSD
R4 ON IA 2/2025)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WP
NO.13098/2024 AND SET ASIDE THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
HC-KAR
10/03/2025, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP
NO.13098/2024.
IN WA NO. 587/2025
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT JUHI GARG
W/O MR. VISHAD GARG,
AGED 48 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.D-102
PURVA FOUNTAIN
SQUARE APARTMENT,
MARATHALLI, WARD NO.85,
BANGALORE - 560037.
2.
SRI VISHAD GARG
S/O SHIV PRAKASH GARG
AGED 52 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.D-102
PURVA FOUNTAIN
SQUARE APARTMENT,
MARATHALLI, WARD NO.85,
BANGALORE - 560037.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RANJITH H.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU,
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
2.
THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
BRUHATH BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
BANGALORE-560002
3.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER
HC-KAR
BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
MAHADEVPURA ZONE,
ITPL MAIN ROAD,
OPPOSITE PHOENIX MARKET CITY,
RHB COLONY,
MAHADEVAPURA,
BENGALURU - 560 048.
4.
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
MAHADEVAPURA ZONE,
HOODI SUB-DIVISION,
HOODY,
BENGALURU - 560048.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.RAVINDRANATH AGA FOR R1;
SRI. K.B.MONESHKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WP No- 2699/2024 (LB-BMP) AND SET ASIDE THE DAILY ORDER
DATED 10.03.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
IN WP No-2699/2024 (LB-BMP).
THESE
APPEALS,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 10.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. The petitioners/owners in the writ petition have put up temporary structures which do not form part of the sanctioned building plan, for which the BBMP has issued notices for removal of the temporary structures. These notices have been challenged on various grounds and therefore, we do not express opinion on the merits of the challenge made by the petitioners on the notices issued to them. However, the undisputed fact remains that the temporary structures put up by the petitioners are not part of the sanctioned building plan and therefore, the learned Single Judge has directed them to remove the temporary structures put up by them at their own cost, failing which the Court will be constrained to issue necessary directions to the authorities of the BBMP to remove the unauthorized temporary structures put up by the petitioners/owners.
HC-KAR
3. We find no infirmity with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge which are only interim orders and therefore, we dismiss these appeals.
4. All the contentions are left open to be urged before the learned Single Judge in the writ petition.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20