Karnataka HC Disposes Neighbour’s Setback Plea After Property Owner Undertakes To Correct Front And Rear Shortfalls

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Court should direct further inspection or action on the petitioner’s complaints concerning setback deviations from the sanctioned plan.

The court held

The Court disposed of the petition, taking the fifth respondent’s undertaking on record that construction would comply with the sanctioned plan and applicable law and that setback deviations would be rectified or kept within regularisable limits.

It also directed

It directed no separate relief for the petitioner but clarified that the authorities must commence proceedings under Section 243 of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 if deviations exceed those limits.

01Facts

The petitioner, owner of a property adjoining the fifth respondent’s property, complained that construction on the latter property deviated from the sanctioned plan and applicable setback requirements.

pp. 4–6

On the petitioner’s request, the High Court directed the Assistant Executive Engineer to inspect the property. The resulting report recorded a front-setback deviation of 11.11%; after the petitioner disputed the measurements, the Jurisdictional Assistant Director of Town Planning (ADTP) confirmed that deviation and also reported a rear-setback deviation of 21.41%.

pp. 4–6

The fifth respondent undertook to rectify the setbacks during construction and to comply with the sanctioned plan and applicable building laws. The respondents submitted that any marginal deviation could be addressed under the notification dated 1 April 2026, subject to its limits for regularisation.

pp. 6–8

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Court should direct further inspection or action on the petitioner’s complaints concerning setback deviations from the sanctioned plan.

pp. 4–6

ii.2. Whether construction could proceed subject to the fifth respondent’s undertaking and the limits for regularisation under the notification dated 1 April 2026.

pp. 7–9

03Law Applied

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution formed the basis of the petition seeking directions to public authorities.

Section 243 of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 was identified as the provision under which the authorities must commence proceedings where deviations exceed the limits capable of regularisation.

p. 9

The Court also considered the notification dated 1 April 2026, which the respondents said permitted regularisation of setback violations subject to prescribed limits, including limits on total and individual-side deviations.

p. 7

The sanctioned building plan and applicable building laws, rules and regulations governed the construction; the Court also noted the Government notification dated 5 January 2026, which the petitioner relied on regarding setbacks. No precedent was cited.

pp. 3–4

Provisions in the judgment · 1

Regulating Entry Of Tibetan Nationals Into India Section 243

04Reasoning

The Court considered the confirmed setback deviations alongside the early stage of construction and the fifth respondent’s undertaking to rectify the front and rear setbacks and otherwise build in accordance with the sanctioned plan and applicable law.

pp. 6–8

In those circumstances, it considered further proceedings on the petition unnecessary, while making clear that disposal would not excuse the authorities from enforcing Section 243 if any deviation exceeded the limits capable of regularisation under the 1 April 2026 notification.

pp. 8–9