- Court
- High Court of Karnataka
- Decided
- 14 July 2026
- Bench
- Lalitha Kanneganti
- Case no.
- WP 20642/2026
Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow Lalitha Kanneganti
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 20642 OF 2026 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN:
¶1SRI. PRAMOD S V S/O. LATE SRI. S.M. VENKATA PATHI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
¶2SRI. RAJIV VENKATAPATHI GOWDA, S/O. LATE SRI. S.M. VENKATA PATHI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.09, 80 FEET ROAD, 2ND CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, H.R.B.R. LAYOUT, KALYANANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR K.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
¶1BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED (BESCOM) REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
¶2THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), E-6 SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, HAL 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 038. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C. CHANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-L; NOTICE, DATED
08.06.2026 BEARING NO.AEE/AET/E6-SD/2026-27/583-86 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ANY ORDER OR DIRECTION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER
The writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
"Wherefore, the petitioners pray that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for connected records pertaining to Notice dated
08.06.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent as per Annexure-L;
a) To quash Annexure-L; Notice dated
08.06.2026 bearing No.AEE/AET/E6-SD/2026-27/583-86 issued by the 2nd respondent by issue a writ of certiorari and any other or direction; and
b) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the objections dated 02.07.2026 submitted by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent to the notice dated
08.06.2026 by providing an opportunity of personal hearing; and
c) To pass such other order/s that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case and to allow the writ petition, with cost in the interest of justice."
¶2Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the respondents have issued a notice dated 08.06.2026, which was received by the petitioner on
29.06.2026, stating that they have been informed by the Assistant Executive Engineer that the petitioner has violated the sanction plan in connection with the construction of the building. Hence, the petitioner is informed to obtain clearance from the Assistant Executive Engineer and submit it to the office within seven days, or otherwise the installation will be disconnected.
¶3Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in response, the petitioner has submitted his reply on 02.07.2026. So far, no orders have been passed. However, they are interfering and threatening to
disconnect the power supply. It is submitted that the respondents, without passing any order, cannot disconnect the power supply.
¶4Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that they will pass appropriate orders and till such time, they will not take any coercive steps.
¶5Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The impugned notice is dated
08.06.2026. It is the case of the petitioner, that he received it on 29.06.2026 and immediately submitted his response. Admittedly, so far no orders have been passed. Without passing any orders, the respondents cannot take any coercive steps.
¶6Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent, this court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER. i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps till the order is passed by them.
ii. After passing the order, they shall give the petitioner at least a week's time to avail the legal remedies. iii. Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58
Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.