1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of parties.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is basically directed against the notice dated 21st October, 2010 issued by Respondent No.1 Dhule Municipal Corporation (for short, the Corporation) under sections 260 and 478 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (for short, BPMC Act) and section 52 and 53 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, MRTP Act). By this notice, petitioners are directed to remove/ demolish a mobile tower/ cellular site within 30 days, which has been erected/ constructed without permission of the Corporation.

3. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is in the business, interalia, of providing infrastructure services for erection of mobile towers/ cellular sites. The petitioners claim that they had applied for permission for erection of the mobile tower as provided for under section 44 of the MRTP Act. Further, it is their case that since the decision on their application for permission for development/ construction of mob