IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2011 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28874 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAVEENDRANADHAN, S/O. PADMANABHAN, AGED 79 YEARS, ELAYIDATHY VEEDU, MEENATHU CHERRY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. JOSE, S/O. JOSEKUTTAN, 56 YEARS, LEELA COTTAGE, ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. BRIJITH, S/O. SEBASTIAN, AGED 71 YEARS, CHARUVILA PUTHAN VEEDU, ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. ASOKAN, S/O. SUKUMARAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. HUSSAIN, S/O. PRADEEP, AGED 24 YEARS, MAVUVILA VEEDU, ADICHANALOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 6. PRASAD, S/O. NEPOLIAN, 39 YEARS, KAMPIVILA VEEDU, ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7. BASHEER, S/O. HANEEFA KUNJU, AGED 55 YEARS, KUCHERIVILA VEEDU, ADICHANALOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 8. JOHN, J.R. BHAVAN, ADICHANALOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 9. JAMALUDDIEN, S/O. SHAHULHAMEED, ULLAS NIVAS, ADICHANALOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN SMT.R.S.SREEVIDYA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ROADS SECTION, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. THE AADICHANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AADICHANELLOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. THE DIRECTOR, KOTTIYAM HOLLY CROSS HOSPITAL, AADICHANELLOOR, KOTTIYAMM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. GT G.P.SMT. RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 28874 of 2011(H) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KOLLAM DIARY OF MILMA EXT.P2 COPY OF THE BILL ISSUED BY THE KOTTIYAM SECTION OF THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO 5TH PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P8 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P9 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 8TH PETITIONER BY R2 DATED NIL. EXT.P10 COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 27.10.2011. EXT.P11 COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 27.10.2011. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. CL ANTONY DOMINIC, J. .............................................. W.P.(C).NO.28874 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 28th day of October, 2011. JUDGMENT Petitioners are street vendors who are having small shops on the western side of Kottiyam-Ottaplamoodu road opposite to the hospital of the 5th respondent. They are aggrieved by Ext.P3 to P9 notices issued by the second respondent requiring them to vacate from the premises and threatening them that in the event of failure, they will be evicted. The main contention raised is that the notices were issued without affording them an opportunity to make their representations in the matter and that therefore, these notices are bad for violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. I heard Government Pleader also in the matter. A reading of the notices itself would indicate that the petitioners were given no prior opportunity in the matter. Therefore, I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that in issuing Exts.P3 to P9, there is violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Therefore, I direct that Exts.P3 to P9 and other communications will be treated as notices and that it will W.P.(C).NO.28874 OF 2011 : 2 : be open to the petitioners to file their objections to the second respondent within ten days from today. If objections are so filed, the second respondent will issue notice to the petitioners, hear them and pass fresh orders in the matter. 4. Subject to filing of the objections as above, it is directed that coercive action pursuant to Exts.P3 to P9 and other notices issued to the petitioners will be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken by the second respondent as directed above. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. cl