1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD).No.3194 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011 K.Pannaiselvam ... Petitioner Vs 1)The District Collector/Inspector of Panchayats, Madurai District, Madurai. 2)The Block Development Officer, Vadipatti Panchayat Union, Vadipatti,Madurai. 3)The Tahsildar, Vadipatti, Madurai. ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 25.02.2011 Na.Ka.No.5122/2009/A5 issued by the first respondent and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.Meena Karapaga Rajam For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Addl.Govt.Pleader ORDER The petitioner is a Panchayat President. Earlier, as per the Writ Petition filed by one of the members, a direction was given by this Court to consider his representation. Pursuant to that, the Inspector of Panchayat, namely, the District Collector, by an order dated 25.02.2011 has issued a notice to the petitioner calling upon him to explain. Aggrieved against the said notice, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition contending that in the earlier Writ Petition, he was not a party and no notice was given before the impugned order came to be passed. He would further contend that even though, he has submitted his reply, the notice is invalid in law. 2. While the matter stood thus, it was brought to the notice of this Court that it is only a show cause notice and the said impugned notice reads as follows:- “......... nkw;go Tl;l mwpf;ifapd;goa[k ;. jkpH;ehL Cuhl;rpfs; rl;lg;gphpt[ vz;/205(11)d;go khtl;l Ma;thsUf;F tH'; ;fg ;gl;l mjpfhuj;jpd; mog;gilapYk;. Cuhl;rpf ;F Vw;gl;l epjpapHg;gpw;F fhuzkhd j';fis Vd; Cuhl;rp kd;wj; jiyth; gjtpapypUe;J e Pf ;fk ; bra;af ;TlhJ vd;gjw;fhd tpsf;fj ;jpid ,f;fojk; fpilf;fg ;bgw;w 15 jpd';fSf;Fs ; rkh;g ;gpf;fj ; bjhptpf;fg ;gLfpwJ/ chpa fhyf;bfLtpw;Fs ; tpsf;fk ; tuhj gl;rj;jpy; Twpf;bfhs;s fhuzk; VJk; ,y;iy vdt[k ; ,Jnt ,Wjpahft[k ; fUjp Mtz';fspd; mog;gilapy; j';fs ; k PJ eltof;if vLf;fg ;gLk; vdt[k ; bjhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ. ” https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. To a specific question to the learned counsel for the petitioner, whether the petitioner has submitted his reply, to which, he would contend that the petitioner has already submitted a reply to the show cause notice. He would mainly contend that the principles of natural justice has been violated before passing the impugned order. Therefore, he has come forward with a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 25.02.2011 Na.Ka.No.5122/2009/A5 issued by the first respondent and quash the same. 4. At this juncture, without going into the merits of the case, suffice to direct that the petitioner is permitted to submit his further explanation by way of reply to the show cause notice and he may be given sufficient opportunities at the time of enquiry and thereafter, orders will be passed by the respondents. Pursuant to that, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the same, if he is aggrieved by the orders by the respondents Hence, since the impugned order is only a show cause notice and present Writ Petition is a premature one and the same is liable to be dismissed. While so, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that he may be permitted to give further explanation also along with supported documents It is seen that even the Block Development Officer concerned has forwarded a letter only on 03.03.2011 and the petitioner has received the same only thereafter and submitted his reply on 16.03.2011. When such being the position, the petitioner is permitted to file additional reply, if any, within a period of one week from today and the respondents after getting the reply and after giving sufficient opportunities of hearing to the petitioner, he will pass appropriate orders and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. 5. In the result, the Writ Petition stands disposed of Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(LA) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar To 1)The District Collector/Inspector of Panchayats, Madurai District, Madurai. 2)The Block Development Officer, Vadipatti Panchayat Union, Vadipatti,Madurai. 3)The Tahsildar, Vadipatti,Madurai. W.P.(MD).No.3194 of 2011 25.03.2011 ssm PA/07.04.2011/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/