The failure to afford a hearing in administrative proceedings undermines the validity of the actions taken, emphasizing the necessity of natural justice.

1. Madho Shoba, the first petitioner, is the minor daughter of Jiwan Lal, the second petitioner. They are residents of village Saproon, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Simla, which was formerly comprised in Punjab State but has now been included in the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh. The petitioners filed the present writ petition on the allegations which are set out below : -
One Bishan Singh sold 7 bighas 12 biswas of land entered in Khata No. 48/67 and comprised in fields No. 295/265/5 Min. to two brothers, Om Prakash and Sardari Lal, on November 6, 1950, for Rs. 2,000 by a registered sale - deed. The said Om Prakash and Sardari Lal sold one bigha out of that land to the first petitioner for Rs. 500 by a deed of sale registered on February 28, 1956. The first petitioner built a house thereon at a cost of Rs. 35,000. The sale in favour of Om Prakash and Sardari Lal was mutated in the revenue records of village Saproon. Some dispute arose between the 1st petitioner and her vendors regarding the boundaries of the land sold to her but it resulted in a compromise under which the area covered by the building constructed by the first petitioner was taken over by the latter in exchange for a part of her land. This exchange was mutated on March 13, 1957. In 1939 the Maharaja of Patiala had acquired land adjoining the land of the first petitioner for "Saproon Market" and mutation in his favour was recorded in the year, 1944. This market land ultimately went to the State of Punjab in 1958 on merger of the then Pepsu State with Punjab State and therefore came to be governed by the Punjab Colonisation of Government Lands Act, 1912 , (hereafter referred to as the said Act). In 1964 the 2nd respondent, the Colonization Officer Punjab Chandigarh sold a plot of land measuring 20 X 30 feet in the area of Mandi Saproon for a shop to Amar Nath, third respondent, and another plot of the same size to Naranjan Singh and Hunsha Singh, respondents 4 and 5 respectively. The said respondents 3 to 5 have built their shops on the plots sold to them. In 1956 a dispute arose between the owners of the shops on the one hand and the petitioners on the other because the respondents 3 to 5 wanted to discharge their foul water by cutting a portion of the hillock belonging to the first petitioner. The first petitioner, therefore, served a notice to the said respondents 3 to 5 asking them not to discharge foul water and not to cut the hillock. The third respondent Amar Nath in his reply dated July 9, 1966, to the notice claimed that "about two feet area belonging to Mandi Saproon had been encroached" by the first petitioner. The Colonization Officer Punjab Chandigarh visited Mandi Saproon on July 28, 1966, when the second petitioner presented an application to him requesting that the respondents 3 to 5 be directed not to construct a drain on the side of the property of the first petitioner. The second respondent, Colonization Officer Punjab, thereupon called respondents 3 to 5 to Chandigarh on July 29, 1966, and in collusion with said respondents 8 to 5 without making any inquiry wrote on the second petitioner's application :
"Please issue notice to Shri Jiwan Lal to show cause why action may not be taken under S.32 of the Punjab Colonization Act, 1912".
In pursuance of this order, a show cause notice dated August 29, 1966, was issued to the second petitioner. In the said notice it was inter alia stated that the second petitioner was in an unauthorized occupation of land belonging to the Colonization Department measuring 520 square feet and situated in the colony of Mandi Saproon and that the second petitioner should show cause "on September 6, 1966, in my Court located at Chandigarh on fourth floor Shop - cum - Flat No. 12, V - 4 Sector 17 why the building / structure unauthorisedly constructed be no