Karnataka High Court
Dr Dr S B Gangadhar vs The Chief Commissioner on 16 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:20715
WP No. 10947 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
WRIT PETITION NO. 10947 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
1. DR. S.B.GANGADHAR
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
S/O LATE SRI BHADRAIAH
R/AT NO.12, 4TH CROSS
BAPUJI LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 040.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
Digitally N.R.SQAURE, BANGALORE-560 001.
signed by
GEETHA P G 2. ZONAL COMMISSIONER (WEST)
Location: BBMP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BUILDING
HIGH 9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND BLOCK
COURT OF JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 011.
KARNATAKA
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF URBAN
PLANNING (SOUTH CENTER)
BBMP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BUILDING
9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND BLOCK
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 011.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. BATHE GOWDA K.V., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:20715
WP No. 10947 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR SUCH OTHER WRIT DIRECTION AND TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT/ FINAL ORDER DATED
06.03.2026 PASSED IN APPEAL NO.62/2025 BY THE CHIEF
COMMISSIONER, AT BENAGLURU, TRUE COPY OF WHICH IS
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
ORAL ORDER
1. On the ground that petitioner has put up construction in
violation of building bye-laws and sanctioned plan, proceedings
have been initiated against the petitioner and the impugned
orders have been passed, wherein, petitioner has been directed
to remove construction put up in violation of the sanctioned
plan. I do not see any error in the orders passed.
2. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
in view of the recent amendments to the laws relating to the
leaving of set back, some of the excessive construction put up
by the petitioner can be saved and a direction may be issued to
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:20715
WP No. 10947 of 2026
HC-KAR
the respondent authorities to consider the same in accordance
with law.
3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the
impugned orders have been passed without taking into
consideration the present amended bye-laws and as per the
bye-laws, some of the excessive construction put up by the
petitioner can be saved. He further submits that respondents
will consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the
amended laws and then will pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law. His submission is placed on record.
4. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) Petitioner is granted three weeks time from
today to make necessary application for
seeking modified sanctioned plan;
(ii) If such an application is made within the said
period, respondents shall consider the same in
accordance with law within a period of three
months thereafter and pass appropriate
orders;
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:20715
WP No. 10947 of 2026
HC-KAR
(iii) If any construction put up by the petitioner in
violation of present buildings bye-laws, the
petitioner shall remove the same;
(iv) Till an order is passed by the authorities
concerned, no precipitative action will be
taken against the petitioner;
(v) Petitioner will not put up any additional
construction on the property concerned till
appropriate orders are passed by the
respondents;
(vi) The writ petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN)
JUDGE
PGG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7
