1 wp1531.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1531 of 2011 Mr. Pankaj Bharat Jagtap ... Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the petitioner. Mr. H.J. Dhedia-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 23rd June, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner challenges the order dated 30th April, 2011 passed by the respondent no. 1 thereby confirming the order of externment dated 22nd January, 2011 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Police, Pune thereby externing the petitioner for a period of one year and six months from Pune District. 3. The perusal of the show-cause notice which is given to the petitioner would reveal that show-cause notice mentioned only two crimes i.e. Crime No. 35/2007 and Crime No. 92/2010. However, perusal of the order passed by the Authority would reveal that in addition to aforesaid two crimes, the authority has also relied on the Crime No. 221/2010. It is thus clear that the authority while passing the impugned order has taken into consideration the material on which the petitioner was not put on show-cause. 2 wp1531.11.sxw 4. It is a settled principle of law that the authority cannot take into consideration the material, which was not put to the notice of the person against whom the action is being taken. This would be patently in violation of principles of natural justice. Petition deserves to be allowed on this short ground alone. 5. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (B.R. GAVAI, J)