WP(C) 2433/2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BP KATAKEY Heard Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms Phukan , learned State counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. Bora, learned standing counsel, Gauhati Municipal Corporation appearing for the respo ndent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. Hazarika, learned counsel appearing for the responden t No. 4. The petitioner, by the present petition, has challenged the notice dated 25.1.20 10 issued by Commissioner, Gauhati Municipal Corporation (GMC), Guwahati under S ection 337(1) and (2) of the Gauhati Municipal Corporation Act, directing the pe titioner to show cause as to why the unauthorized construction or deviation shou ld not be demolished with a further direction to discontinue the works of erecti on or re-erection of the Assam Type house at Lankeswar. Admittedly, the petition er on receipt of such notice submitted his show cause reply on 1.2.2010. Mr. Bora, learned standing counsel for the GMC, producing the records, has submi tted that since the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 is a civil dispute, the authority has found that they have no role to play in such c ivil dispute. Mr. Bora, could not, however, apprise this Court about the action taken on the notice dated 25.1.2010 issued by the Commissioner. The records as produced by Mr. Bora reveal that the Commissioner, GMC took the d ecision that it has no role to play in the matter of civil dispute between the p etitioner and the respondent No. 4, on the basis of a representation dated 28.8. 2009 filed by Ms Sumati Talukdar, respondent No. 4. Nothing could be placed befo re this Court about the decision taken by the Corporation relating to the procee ding initiated by it by issuing the notice dated 25.1.2010. Whether any construction made by the petitioner is liable to be demolished, for making such construction without obtaining the permission as required under the provisions of the GMC Act, 1971 can in no stretch of imagination be a civil disp ute between the two parties. The Corporation having initiated the proceeding by issuing the notice dated 25.1.2010 under Section 337(1) and (2) of the said Act has to take a final decision on such notice, after consideration of the relevant factors including the show cause submitted by the petitioner. Since nothing could be placed before this Court about taking any final decision in that regard, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to t he Commissioner, GMC respondent No. 3 to consider the representation submitted b y the petitioner on 1.2.2010 and take a final decision in the proceeding initiat ed by issuing the notice dated 25.1.2010. Such final order shall be passed withi n a period of three weeks from today. It is needless to say that if the parties are aggrieved by any order that may be passed by the Commissioner on such proceeding, it is open to them to take appro priate legal action. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No cost. A copy of this order be furnished to Mr. Bora, learned standing counsel for the GMC.