Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.- Notice on behalf of opposite party no.1 has been accepted by Mr. Manish Kumar, as well as Mr. D.K. Upadhyay has accepted notice for opposite party no.6 and notice for opposite party no.7 has been accepted by Mr. Kapil Mishra. Notice to opposite parties no.2 to 5 is exempted. 2. Mr. N.K. Seth, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sachin Garg, appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has preferred a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction along with application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. before the opposite party no.1, the same has been registered as Regular Suit No. 1167 of 2011 (Lucknow Navnirman Samiti Versus Roshan Sahkari Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd. and others). 3. The learned court below while entertaining the said suit has issued notices to the opposite parties on application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. with the observation that no sufficient ground exists for granting ex-parte interim order. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the plot in question fall within the area notified under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, for which notification has been issued on 29.9.2011. The proceedings under Section 6(1) of the Act are yet to be completed. After the issuance of the notification under Section (4) of the Act, the opposite parties have no right to make any construction on the plot in question. His further submission is that since the plot in question fall within the municipal limits of Lucknow Nagar Nigam and Lucknow Development Authority, therefore, before taking any activities of construction over the plot in question, the opposite parties are required to obtain sanction for layout and building plan. 5. In the present case the opposite parties are raising constructions without any sanction from the opposite party no.6. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the letter dated 12.10.2011 written by the Secretary, Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow to Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow and other policeyy authorities informing that certain illegal building and construction activities are going on in the area notified by the notification dated 29.9.2011, therefore, suitable action should be taken, in this regard. 6. 6. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the area in question, High Tension Transmission Line of 132 KV is laid down by the U.P. Power Corporation and as per the guidelines issued by the U.P. Power Corporation within the limit of 13.5 meters either side of High Tension Wire no construction activity can be permitted. 7. Learned counsel for opposite parties no.1, 6 and 7 do not dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the parties' counsel. 9. Prima-facie, I am satisfied that after the issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, no construction activity can be permitted on the plots notified. Moreover, no person can be permitted to raise construction without sanction of layout/building plan by the competent authority. 10. In this view of the matter, with the consent of parties' counsel and without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction that till the disposal of the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C. pending in Regular Suit No.1167 of 2011, no construction shall be raised by the opposite parties no. 2 to 5. 11. The aforesaid observations made by this Court would not come in the way of disposal of application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 C.P.C., which shall be considered and decided on merits by the court concerned.