IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 29067 of 2005(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.R.GOVINDAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.LATE M.A.RAMAN, R/O.MANALIKKATTIL HOUSE, KESAVAPADI.P.O., OLLUR, TRICHUR DISTRICT, (RETIRED SPECIAL OFFICER,MARKETING CENTRE,SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,OLLUR). BY ADV. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PB NO.50, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, SIDCO MARKETING DIVISION, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM-682020. 3. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, SIDCO MARKETING CENTRE, OLLUR, TRICHUR. ADV. SRI.P.FAZIL, SC, SIDCO FOR R1 TO R3 MS.P.K.RADHIKA, SC FOR SIDCO THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.29067/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 13/09/2001 ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER. P2 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 30/09/2005 ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.29067 of 2005 (I) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner joined the services of the 1st respondent in 1966 and retired on 31/10/2003 as Special Officer. After his retirement, he was issued Ext.P2 notice dated 30/09/2005, calling upon the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.69,706/- towards the loss sustained by the Corporation due to his lapses. It is challenging Ext.P2, this writ petition has been filed. 2. There is no counter affidavit filed by respondents. 3. As rightly pointed out, Ext.P2 notice of demand requiring the petitioner to remit the amount and threatening to initiate revenue recovery proceedings has been issued without even issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner. Therefore, if at all any liability is to be fixed and the same is to be recovered such action can only be in accordance with compliance of natural justice. This requires that the affected party should be issued a show cause notice, should be given an opportunity to file his objections and WP(C) No.29067/2005 -2- should be heard in the matter. This has not been done and therefore, Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. Ext.P2 is therefore quashed, without prejudice to the right of the respondents to issue show cause notice to the petitioner, give him an opportunity to make his representations in the matter, and to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg