In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate writ or direction. 2. The facts of the case in brief may be stated as follows : The petitioner owns and possesses a plot of land measuring 1 katha l0 lechas under Dag No.586 of Kheraj Periodic Patta No.282 of Village Japorigog under Beltola Mouza in the district of Kamrup, Assam. The municipal holding number of the aforesaid plot of land is 79 of Ward No.29 (GS Road) of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation. The petitioner states that the Municipal and urban tax for the aforesaid land have been paid upto 31 st March, 1995. The petitioner submitted an application before the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority for issuance of No-objection Certificate in respect of proposed construction of building as well as boundary wall on 1.2.95 and deposited necessary fees on the same day. Alongwith the application the petitioner also enclosed relevant documents and particulars as per requirement. The petitioner states that on 8th February, 1995 the staff of the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority inspected the site and found everything in order. On 4.2.95 the petitioner also ceremonially laid the foundation of the building on the said plot of land. The petitioner further states that on 10.2.95 officials of Guwahati Municipal Corporation respondent No.l came to the said land and threatened before the Chowkidar that they would demolish the foundation and the protective walls erected by the petitioner. Hence the present petition. 3. I have heard Mr. C. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. AB Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 4. According to Mr. Baruah, Gauhati Municipal Corporation had no authority and jurisdiction to demolish the foundation laid by the petitioner on an auspicious day, without following the procedure. Mr. Baruah has challenged the action of the officials of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation on the following grounds. That as per section 337 (2) of the Guwabati Municipal Corporation Act, 1971 (for short, the Act), before removal of any structure by dismentaling it, the Municipal Corporation is under obligation to issue notice. Besides, the foundation and protective wall cannot be said to be 'building' within the meaning of section 3 (4) nor the same can be termed as 'erection' or 're-erection' within the meaning of section 3 (25) of the Act. According to Mr. Besides, the foundation and protective wall cannot be said to be 'building' within the meaning of section 3 (4) nor the same can be termed as 'erection' or 're-erection' within the meaning of section 3 (25) of the Act. According to Mr. Baruah no notice was ever served on the petitioner. Therefore, the threatened action is illegal and without jurisdiction. Mr. Choudhury very candidly informs this Court that there cannot be any removal without following the procedure prescribed and in the present case as averred by the petitioner there was no notice. I am satisfied that action of removal cannot be taken without following the procedure prescribed under section 337 of the Act. 5. In view of the above, I direct the respondents not to take any action for removal of the structure. If the respondents are satisfied that the action of the petitioner was illegal and contrary to the Gauhati Municipal Corporation Act, then the Corporation may take action strictly in accordance with the provisions of law after giving due notice. 6. With the above direction and observation the petition is disposed of.