Anoop V. Mohta, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

2. The Petitioners, being the owner, Developer and Constituted Attorney, have challenged impugned communication/letters dated 5 March 2012 and 10 April 2013 issued by Respondents-Corporation, thereby revoked the Letter of Intent (for short, LOI) issued earlier and not considering the request for additional TDR against the construction of road.

3 The relevant prayers of the Petitioners are as under:-

“(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for the records and proceedings pertaining to the subject matter and after examining the legality, validity and impropriety of the impugned Letters dated 5.3.2012 (Ex. B and B-1 hereto) and impugned letter dated 10th April 2013 (Ex. C hereto), be pleased to quash and set aside the same, being invalid and illegal and ultra vires;

(b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to issue to Pe