JUDGMENT : 1. The Petitioner-M/s.Sri Sai Developers has filed this petition with the following prayers:- "(a) Quash the communication bearing No.STRRPA/TP-3/10/2016-17 dated 28.8.2017 issued by the 4th respondent (Annexure AB) and (b) Direct the respondents not to undo or damage the 18.30 metre Road formed in the Layout formed by S. Sarala in Ballur Village as evidenced in Annexure E, L and Q which is the only mode of access to the Layout formed for the benefit of the petitioner and (c) Hold that the 18.3 metre road formed by the Developers in the Ballur village as evidenced in Annexure E, L and Q to provide connectivity to their layouts is not a Road formed on either a Rajakaluve or a Kaluve and (d) Restrain the Police authorities from interfering with the construction activity in the layout plans on the basis of the impugned orders. e. Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved of the temporary cancellation of the Layout plan sanctioned in favour of the petitioner in terms of Section 76-O of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, by the Respondent-BMRDA. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a contention that the remedy by way of civil suit will not be available to the petitioner, as this is a statutory order. 4. This contention is absolutely misconceived and deserves to be rejected at the threshold. 5. The other contention raised by the leaned counsel for the petitioner is that no prior show cause notice before the impugned order is passed is also misconceived, as it is only a temporary cancellation of the Layout plan and the matter is pending consideration and investigation by the Respondents-Authorities, where the petitioner has all the opportunities to lead proper evidence and raise objections. 6. The references given in the impugned order Annexure-AB dated 28.08.2017, prima-facie, discloses that the said approved Layout plan appears to have been temporarily cancelled and an enquiry is held upon the alleged encroachment of RajaKaluve or State Storm Drain by the petitioner as well as by another developer Ms.Sarala. This enquiry is being at the instance of Mr.K.R.Suresh Babu, the Hon'ble Minister concerned. 7. This enquiry is being at the instance of Mr.K.R.Suresh Babu, the Hon'ble Minister concerned. 7. The relevant portion of the impugned order of the Respondent-BMRDA Annexure-AB dated 28.08.2017 is quoted below for ready reference:- "BMRDA SATELLITE TOWN RING ROAD (STRR) PLANNING AUTHORITY No.STRRPA/TP-3/10/2016-17 Dated: 28.08.2017 ORDER OF TEMPORARILY CANCELLING THE LAYOUT PLAN AS PER SECTION 76(0) OF THE KARNATAKA TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT, 1961 Subject: Regarding the request made by Sri.KR Suresh Babu, Hon'ble Minister to cancel the approved layout plans which are obtained after furnishing false information to the planning authority and forming a road by encroaching upon the storm drain. Reference: (1) Records of Anekal Planning Authority bearing No.AaYoPr/LAO/08/2010-11 dated 04.08.2010. (2) Record No. No.AaYoPr/LAO/08/2010- 11 (Part- II) dated 20.04.2015. (3) Record No. No.AaYoPr/LAO/162/2013-14 dated 23.04.2014. (4) Complaint of Sri.MS Jithendra, Advocate dated 07.09.2016 (5) Reply of M/s.Sai Developers and M/s.SV Constructions dated 15.11.2016 and 11.11.2016 (6) Letter addressed to the Tahsildar, Anekal dated 11.05.2017. (7) Letter of Tahsildar, Anekal dated 28.02.2017. Xxxxxxxxxxxxx The letter dated 28.02.2017, issued to the Member, Secretary of the Anekal Planning Authority by the Thasildar, Anekal was received by this office on 26.05.2017. The Thasildar has stated that "in this regard, the report of the Assistant Thasildar and the sketch prepared by the surveyor has confirmed that road is formed encroaching upon the storm drain and as per the order of the Deputy Commissioner this encroachment is removed. Since the survey work of remaining lands are still due, the encroachment will be removed after completion of survey work". In this regard, the office has requested to send complete information and the sketch. It is decided on 02.08.2017 by the Satellite Town Ring Road (STRR) Planning Authority vide proceedings in Special Subject 4.36 to temporarily cancel the approval granted by the authority to the layout plan and the release of sites under Section 76(O) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 in the background of the letter of the Thasildar, Anekal dated 28.02.2017 that on consideration of the report of the Assistant Thasildar and the sketch prepared by the Surveyor, it is confirmed that road is formed by encroaching upon the storm drain. In the background of the above facts, in pursuance of the decision dated 02.08.2017 in special subject 4.36 and the letter dated 28.02.2017 issued by the Thasildar, Anekal to the Member Secretary, Anekal Planning Authority, the approval granted by the authority to the layout plan and order of the release of sites is hereby temporarily cancelled under Section 76(o) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961. Sd/- Member Secretary Satellite Town Ring Road (STRR) Planning Authority and Town Planner BMRDA, Bengaluru". 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is satisfied that such temporary cancellation of the Layout to hold an enquiry in the matter as to whether, these two Developers have encroached upon the State Storm Drain or Raja Kaluve or not and whether it exists there or not, does not require any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. The petitioners as well as other Developer have an opportunity to show cause before the concerned Satellite Town Ring Road Planning Authority and Town Planner, BMRDA, Bangalore, in the matter and adduce relevant evidence before them for establishing their case in the matter. If they are not satisfied with the orders that may be passed by the said Authority, the petitioner can always raise such questions of facts before the competent Civil Court as these are the questions of facts, which require proof of evidence in a trial and which cannot be done in the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. Therefore, with the aforesaid observations and liberty to the petitioner, the petition is disposed of as premature. No costs.