MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.:–The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the notice dated 01.02.2021 as also the notice dated 24.02.2021 issued by the Municipal Executive Officer, Danapur Nagar Parishad, Danapur i.e. the respondent no. 6, whereby and where under the respondent Parishad has purported to seal the telecommunication tower installed by the petitioner company on the ground that no permission has been taken for installing the same. The petitioner has also prayed to direct the respondents to immediately unseal the telecommunication tower installed by the petitioner company at the premises of one Ms. Shakuntala Devi situated at Sadhu Ji Ka Khatal, Gajadhar Chauk, Danapur, District-Patna, Bihar, appertaining to Khesra No. 712, Khata No. 631, Thana No. 21, situated within the territorial limits of Danapur Nagar Parishad.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had installed a ground based tower in the aforesaid premises in the year 2004 pursuant to an agreement entered into with the said Smt. Shakuntala Devi, as extended by an agreement dated 21.11.2014 for a further period of 15 years. It is submitted that the respondent State authorities vide notification dated 08.10.2012 had notified the Bihar Communication Towers & Related Structure Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules, 2012’) whereafter the petitioner company had received a demand notice for payment of the registration fees and renewal charges, which was challenged by the petitioner company before this Court by filing two writ petitions, however, during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petitions bearing CWJC No. 3300 of 2013 and CWJC No. 3159 of 2013, the State Government notified the Bihar Mobile Tower, Optical Fibre Cables (OFC) & Related Telecom Infrastructure Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules, 2020’) vide notification dated 19.08.2020 and the aforesaid Rules, 2012 were repealed. The aforesaid writ petitions were allowed vide order dated 29.09.2020 passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court and it was directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner unless the process under the Rules, 2020 were finalized. Nonetheless, the respondent no. 6 has issued a notice dated 01.02.2021 as also a notice dated 24.02.2021, whereby and whereunder the respondent Parishad has purported to seal the telecommunication tower installed by the petitioner company at the premises of the aforesaid Smt. Shakuntala Devi on the ground that no permission has been taken for installing the tower in a residential area and that a complaint has been received with regard to EMF radiation. The petitioner company is stated to have furnished its detailed response to the aforesaid notices on 25.02.202 and had stated that it provides passive infrastructure to the telecom service providers and the EMF radiation, which is within the permissible range, are emitted by the active infrastructure belonging to the telecom service providers. It was also stated that the action of the respondent Parishad was contrary to the Rules, 2012 as well as the Rules, 2020 and that the Rules mandate that before sealing the tower in question, consent of the Urban Development and Housing Department is essential. Nonetheless, without affording any opportunity of hearing and without obtaining the consent of the Urban Development & Housing Department, the respondent no. 6 had sealed the telecommunication tower installed by the petitioner company at the aforesaid premises of Smt. Shakuntala Devi.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the State Government was required to finalize the process of regularization of towers, installed prior to the coming into force of the Rules, 2020, since the registration was required to be done within a period of six months, however, since there was some delay, the State Government had issued a notification dated 19.03.2021, extending the said period by further six months i.e. till 29.08.2021. The petitione