WP(C) 4953/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE. BD AGARWAL Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Bora, learne d Standing counsel for the GMC. The petitioner herein is challenging the notice dated 12.9.2011 issued by the Commissioner, Guwahati Municipal Corporation, Guwahati asking the writ petitioner to show cause as to why construction work taken up by him in the plot described in Schedule ’A’ in the notice, shall not be discontinued. Mr. Das submitted that the notice was vague no effective reply could be submitted. Hence, the writ petitioner has submitted a letter to the GM C on 15.9.2011 asking for full details of the alleged illegal construction. Lear ned counsel for the writ petitioner further submitted that all the constructions have been done on the basis of various orders in the form of NOC received from the GMC as well as GMDA and as such impugned notice should be set aside. In my considered opinion, instead of asking for the details from the GMC about the alleged illegal construction, the petitioner can furnish all the documents of his constructions. In other words, it appears to me that the pe titioner is avoiding to submit a detail reply to delay the decision of the GMC. Hence, the petitioner is directed to submit the reply containing all the details of the construction with necessary documents. Thereafter, the GMC shall examine the reply and the documents and if they are not satisfied, a fresh notice with specific charge of illegal construction shall be furnished to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to submit his reply within a week fro m to-day and till the reply is disposed of, no coercive method shall be adopted by the GMC. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition stands closed.