WP(C) 4694/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. A.K. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Phukan, le arned State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, Mr. Bora, learned s tanding counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 and 5 and Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.6 and 7. The petitioner by the present petition has prayed for a direction to the respondent Guwahati Municipal Corporation to implement the request made by the Sub-Divisional Officer (S), Kamrup(M) in the communication dated 27.09.2006 requ esting the Collector, GMC to take necessary steps to remove the unauthorized con struction of wall, if any. According to the petitioner, the respondent Nos.6 and 7 raised the boundary wall unauthorisedly without obtaining any permission, for which though he approached the Municipal authority as well as the District Admi nistration, such unauthorized construction has not been removed. It is also the case of the petitioner that despite the request made by the Sub-Divisional Offic er (S), the Municipal authority did not take any steps for removal of the unauth orized construction, which compelled the petitioner to approach this Court with the grievance, as noticed above. Mr. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner su bmits that since an unauthorized construction has been made by the respondent No s.6 and 7 without obtaining necessary permission from the GMC, necessary action for removal of such unauthorized construction has to be taken by the GMC authori ty, which has not been done. Mr. Bora, learned standing counsel for the GMC, on the other hand, placi ng reliance on the averments made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed on 08.02. 2008 submits that on 11.08.2006 a notice was issued to the respondent No.7 askin g him to produce the no objection certificate and copy of the approved plan and thereafter the notice dated 06.10.2007 was issued to the said respondent under S ection 337 of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1969 asking him to show-ca use as to why the unauthorized construction shall not be removed. According to M r. Bora since the order of status quo has been passed by this Court on 21.09.200 7, no further action could be taken by the respondent Corporation on such procee ding. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 subm its that though the allegations in the writ petition is that those respondents c onstructed the wall unauthorisedly, no notice has however been issued to the res pondent No.6 and the notice stated to be issued on 06.10.2007 has never been ser ved on the respondent No.7. It has also been submitted by Mr. Singh that if any notice is issued and served on the respondents, they will definitely submit the necessary reply. It appears that the grievance of the petitioner is relating to the alleg ed unauthorized construction of boundary wall by the respondent Nos.6 and 7 over a plot of land. Though the Municipal authority on 06.10.2007 issued the notice to the respondent No.7, the receipt of which has been disputed by the respondent No.7, no further proceeding could be taken because of the order of status quo p assed by this Court on 21.09.2007. That being the position, the present petition is disposed of directing t he Commissioner, GMC to issue fresh notice(s) to the respondent Nos.6 and 7 as r equired under Section 337 of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1969 seekin g explanation from the said respondents as to why the unauthorized construction, if any, shall not be demolished and to take final decision in the said proceedi ng upon consideration of the show-cause reply that may be submitted by the respo ndent Nos.6 and 7, pursuant to such notice(s) to be issued by the Commissioner. The entire exercise is directed to be completed within a period of 3(three) mont hs from today. It is needless to say that the Municipal authority can only decid e the matter relating to the unauthorized construction, if any, and cannot distu rb the possession of anyone over the land. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. A copy of this order be furnished to Mr. Bora, learned standing counsel GMC.