:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2008 M/s. Goyal Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ..Petitioners versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Rajiv Narula i/b. M/s. Jhangiani, Narula & Ass. for the Petitioners. Mr. Pradep Jadhav, AGP, for the Respondent No.1 - State. Mr. N. A. Shaikh for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - MCGM. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2008. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard. 2. The Petitioners have challenged notices under Section 354-A of the M.M.C. Act. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the Corporation states that there is a misapprehension in the petitioners mind that the notices pertain to Building ’D’ and that there is a direction that the :2: work has to be stopped. According to the Corporation, the notices does not pertain to Building ’D’ but pertain to the three items which are situate within the premises of Building ’D’. 4. The learned counsel for the Corporation also accepts the petitioners statement that Item Nos. 1 and 2 of notice dated 27.5.2008 have been rectified. According to the Corporation there is an objection only regarding the location of underground tank. Learned counsel for the petitioners asserts that the tank has been constructed in accordance with the Regulations at a distance of 2.5 meters of the compound wall. This is denied by the Corporation. This is purely a disputed question of fact and this Court will not entertain the petition on this ground. Petitioners are at liberty to make a representation to the Respondents. Petition is disposed of with the above directions. (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)