THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.28721 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent contained in the show cause notice No.1109M/3221(A)/KWS-23/2011, dated 17-10-2011 issued by the 2nd respondent suggesting disconnection of raw water supply to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents to continue to supply water to the petitioner in terms of Memo No.4618/K1/2011, dated 01-04-2011 of the 1st respondent. 2. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would go to show that the 1st respondent vide Memo No. 4618/K1/2011, dated 01-04-2011 permitted the petitioner to draw raw water of 0.25 mgd for the purpose of industrial consumption and the said grant has contained the terms and conditions relating to the drawal of raw water. Pursuant to the said memo, the petitioner entered into agreement with the respondents for abiding with the terms and conditions contained in the said memo. While the matter stood thus, the 2nd respondent issued show-cause notice, dated 17-10-2011 alleging that the petitioner is selling water on commercial basis to certain firms/industries/agencies and therefore, the petitioner violated the conditions of the agreement and called upon the petitioner to submit explanation. The impugned show cause notice does not indicate about the alleged violation of conditions of the agreement and details of the alleged firms/industries/agencies to whom the petitioner is allegedly selling water on commercial basis enabling him to submit effective explanation. Hence, the writ petition. 3. The adjudicating authority must disclose all material placed before it in the course of proceedings and must afford an opportunity to the person against whom it is sought to be utilized. The object underlying such disclosure is to afford an opportunity to the person to enable him to prepare his defence, rebut it and put forward his case before the authority. 4. As per clause 3 (3) of the Government memo No.2961/A1/2010, dated 26-03-2010, and as per clause (3) of the agreement, the petitioner should not sell water to any other firm on commercial basis and shall use for his own industrial purpose. As it came to the notice of the Government that the petitioner was selling water on commercial basis to certain firms/industries/agencies, the petitioner was directed to give the information with regard to supply of raw water to the firms viz., 1) Names of the industries/agencies/firms to whom raw water is supplied 2) Total quantity supplied to the above industries/agencies/ firms, 3) Rate at which water is supplied to the above industries/agencies/ firms and 4) Date from which raw water is being made to the industries/agencies/ firms. As seen from the impugned show-cause notice, it does not indicate details of the industries/agencies/ firms to which the petitioner is allegedly selling water on commercial basis. Similarly, the show-cause notice is very vague, for which, it is not possible for any prudent person to give explanation. As seen from the impugned memo, it is clear that the petitioner has no right to sell water to any other firms on commercial basis and the petitioner shall use the raw water for his own industrial purpose. If found or proved selling water, the connection will be disconnected with immediate effect and liable for penalty. The present show-cause notice is very vague and it does not contain any details with regard to selling of raw water to the industries/agencies/firms on commercial basis. Therefore, the show- cause notice has to be quashed. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the show cause notice No.1109M/3221(A)/KWS-23/2011, dated 17-10-2011 issued by the 2nd respondent giving liberty to the respondents to give fresh show-cause notice furnishing details with regard to violation of clause 3 (3) of the Government Memo No.2961/A1/2010, dated 26-03-2010 and clause (3) of the agreement and after receipt of explanation from the petitioner, take appropriate decision in accordance with law. No order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 28-10-2011 Hsd