[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri B S Suresh vs The Chief Commissioner on 5 February, 2026

                                       -1-
                                                   NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB
                                                    WA No. 199 of 2026


            HC-KAR



                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                   DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                    PRESENT

                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

                                       AND

                     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

                     WRIT APPEAL NO. 199 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)


            BETWEEN:

            1.    SRI B S SURESH,
                  AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
                  S/O LATE SHAMANNA REDDY,
                  RESIDING AT NO.454, 4TH CROSS,
                  BELLANDUR, BENGALURU 560 103
                                                           ...APPELLANT

            (BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL ALONG WITH
Digitally       SRI. KARTHIK V., ADVOCATE)
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K           AND:
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF    1.    THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER,
KARNATAKA
                  BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
                  J C ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.


            2.    THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                  BBMP, DODDANEKKUNDI SUB-DIVISION,
                  BENGALURU 560 037
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB
                                        WA No. 199 of 2026


HC-KAR




3.   THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
     GRATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY,
     DODDANEKKUNDI SUB-DIVISION,
     EAST MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,
     BENGALURU 560 037

4.   BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY
     COMPANY LIMITED,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS
     MANAGING DIRECTOR,
     CAUVERY BHAVAN,
     BENGALURU 560 009.

5.   THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE
     ENGINEER (ELE.)
     S-7, ASWATH NAGAR,
     MARATHHALLI, BESCOM,
     BENGALURU-560037
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)


      THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE
RECORDS IN WP NO.123/2026 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED    14/01/2026   THEREIN,   THE   WRIT    PETITION   BE
DISPOSED OF PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF THE APPELLANT TO
PUT UP FURTHER CONSTRUCTION AS SOUGHT FOR, BY
ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT AND
GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER/JUDGMENT.


      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
                              -3-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB
                                         WA No. 199 of 2026


HC-KAR




CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
       and
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

                    ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present intra Court appeal has been filed

impugning the interim order dated 14.01.2026 passed by

the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.123/2026 filed by the

appellant/petitioner. This is a second writ petition filed by

the petitioner on the same subject matter.

2. Before filing the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner

had filed W.P.No.26540/2025 praying therein that the

order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the Assistant Executive

Engineer, BBMP, Doddanekundi Sub-Division, Bengaluru,

be set aside and the electricity connection be restored to

the petitioner's building.

3. The learned Single Judge, vide interim order dated

01.09.2025 passed in W.P.No.26540/2025, had directed

the respondent-authority to restore the electricity to the

building of the petitioner with a rider that the petitioner

NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB

HC-KAR

should not put up any additional construction on the

property. The electricity to the building of the petitioner

was restored in compliance of the said interim order dated

01.09.2025.

4. Thereafter, W.P.No.26450/2025 was taken up for

final hearing and vide order dated 26.11.2025, the learned

Single Judge, in paragraph Nos.7 and 8, had observed as

under:-

"7. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has now stated that he would file an appeal, it is appropriate to permit the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appropriate Authority. At the same time, It is also appropriate to direct respondent Nos.3 and 4 to restore the electricity supply to the building constructed by the petitioner, subject however to the condition that the petitioner shall not put up any further construction of whatsoever nature until the appeal before the Appellate Authority is disposed off.

8. It is made clear that if the petitioner puts up any further construction of whatsoever nature, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to approach

NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB

HC-KAR

this Court seeking orders to stop such construction or seal the building of the petitioner."

5. Thus, the interim order dated 01.09.2025 was in

operation when the final order dated 26.11.2025 came to

be passed in the aforesaid W.P.No.26450/2025. While

permitting the petitioner to file an appeal against the order

dated 07.07.2025, the learned Single Judge had directed

that the petitioner shall not put up any additional

construction till the appeal filed by him would get decided.

6. The petitioner has now filed the second writ petition

in W.P.No.123/2026 (LB-BMP) in which the following

interim directions have been issued at paragraph Nos.2

to 4:-

"2. The submission of the impleading applicant is that the petitioner is still going on with the construction. Respondent No.3 is directed to cause the inspection of the property and to ensure that no further construction takes place. Respondent No.3 is also directed to get a CCTV camera installed at the construction site at the cost of the petitioner with a recording facility for 90 days, so that any

NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB

HC-KAR

construction activity including plastering or the like is captured in the said CCTV, and also to ascertain, if there is any further violation being made by the petitioner of the order dated 01.09.2025 in WP No.26450/2025.

3. The report of the 2nd respondent to be filed by 28.01.2026 with a sample video recording made. It is made clear that if any further construction has taken place, necessary action would have to be taken against the official respondents.

4. The petitioner is restrained from occupying the premises or causing occupation of the premises by anyone. The jurisdictional BESCOM and BWSSB are restrained from granting any electricity or water connection to the said property, other than the temporary connection already provided."

7. To test the bona fides of the petitioner, the learned

Single Judge, in W.P.No.123/2026, has observed that it

has to be seen whether the petitioner has put up any

additional construction in violation of the interim order

dated 01.09.2025 passed in W.P.No.26450/2025 inasmuch

as the electricity connection to the building of the

NC: 2026:KHC:6925-DB

HC-KAR

petitioner was restored on the condition that he should not

put up any additional construction.

8. The matter is sub judice before the learned Single

Judge in W.P.No.123/2026 and we do not think that the