having agreed to collect ground rent issued N.O.C. for erection of Uni-Poles at 3 different Darga lands. Thereafter, the petitioner made applications dated 0201-2003, 06-01-2003, 23-01-2003 and 17-04-2003 enclosing the necessary certificates as well as the N.O.C. of the landlord seeking the permission of the respondent-Corporation for erecting the hoardings on Uni-Poles at the above said 3 sites. The petitioner also paid necessary advertisement fees by way of pay orders and cheques. The said application of the petitioner was rejected by order dated 31-03-2003 on the ground that the Tank Bund is under banned Zone where erection of hoardings is not allowed. On receipt of the said order, the petitioner made a representation dated 06-01-2003 requesting the Commissioner to reconsider the issue stating that the Tank Bund was presently hosting several hoardings including the hoardings which were tendered and allotted by M.C.H. However, M.C.H. failed to respond though the Cheques/Demand Drafts enclosed with the applications of the petitioner were uncashed in July, 2003. The petitioner states that in the absence of any specific order rejecting permission and since the advertisement fees paid by them along with their applications was encashed, the petitioner commenced the fabrication of Uni-Pole structures. While so, the Corporation by letter dated 0108-2003 directed the petitioner to stop the erection work. Since the petitioner has already invested a huge amount of Rs.30 to 40 lakhs they made a representation dated 06-09-2003 requesting the M.C.H. to withdraw the letter dated 01-08-2003 and allow them to proceed with the erection of hoardings on Uni-Pole structures. Since there was no response the petitioner made a further representation dated 15-11-2003 informing the M.C.H. that in the absence of the formal rejection it should be deemed that they are granted the permission and therefore they are entitled to proceed with the work. Then by letter dated 22-11-2003 the M.C.H informed the petitioner that the Corporation is formulating uniform type and design of Uni-Poles and also framing policy guidelines on hoardings which is under consideration and that the request of the petitioner for grant of permission for erection of Uni-Poles at the locations proposed by them will be examined soon after the finalisation of the policy guidelines. The petitioner was also informed that under Section 622(7) of the H.M.C. Act, 1955 mere acceptance of fee for a licence or permission shall not by itself entitle the person paying the fees, to grant of licence or permission and therefore the petitioner shall not proceed with the erection of Uni-Poles until and
