Issuance of legal notices must adhere to principles of natural justice by providing specific details regarding allegations and actions proposed.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P8 demand notice issued by the 1^st respondent. When the demand notice was issued on an earlier occasion, the petitioner had approached this Court, which culminated in Ext.P5 judgment, wherein paragraph 9 reads as follows:

“9. Reverting to the facts, notice dated 11.06.2019 issued by the first respondent to the petitioner before Ext.P3 order reads thus:

“മാവേ(cid:4)ലിക്കര താലൂക്കിൽ വെ(cid:4)ട്ടിയാർ (cid:4)ിവേ(cid:16)ജിൽ വേ(cid:18)ാക്ക് നമ്പർ 6 ൽ

384/12-1, 12-4, 12-5-2, 12-2, 12-3 റീസർവേti നമ്പർ എന്നി(cid:4)യിൽവെ(cid:28)ട്ടതും താങ്കളുവെ! ഉ!മസ്തതയിലുള്ളതുമായ സ്‌ഥലത്തുനിന്നും

1 അനധികൃതമായിസാധാരണമണ്ണ്ഖനനംവെ0യ്തുനീക്കംവെ0യ്തതായസൂ0ന

2 റിവേ(cid:28)ാർട്ടിവെ4 അ!ിസ്ഥാനത്തിൽ ന!ത്തിയ സൂ0ന സ്ഥലപരിവേ8ാധനയിൽ .

ആയത് വേ:ാധ്യവെ(cid:28)ട്ടിട്ടുള്ളതും അളന്നു തിട്ടവെ(cid:28)ടുത്തിയിട്ടുള്ളതുമാണ് അനധികൃത .

ധാതുഖനനവുംക!ത്തുസൂ0ന0ട്ടങ്ങൾ പ്രകാരംകുറ്റകരവും 8ിക്ഷാർഹവുമാണ്

3 !ിഅനധികൃത ഖനനത്തിവെനതിവെര സൂ0ന 0ട്ടങ്ങൾ പ്രകാരം ന!പ!ി

26.06.19 സ്വീകരിക്കാതിരിക്കാൻതക്ക കാരണമുവെKങ്കിൽ ആയത് ന് മുമ്പായി

.

ഈആഫീസിൽവേനരിട്ട്ഹാജരായിവേരഖാമൂലംവേ:ാധി(cid:28)ിവേക്കKതാണ് അ(cid:16)ാത്ത പക്ഷം ഇനിവെയാരറിയിപ്പുകൂ!ാവെത താങ്കൾവെക്കതിവെര നിയമ ന!പ!ി

സ്വീകരിക്കുന്നതാണ്

.”

As evident from the notice, though the same refers to the act which constitutes the breach of law attracting adverse action, the first respondent has not disclosed the quantity of ordinary earth stated to have been removed by the petitioner from the land. The notice does not indicate the particulars of the action proposed against the petitioner, precisely the power that is proposed to be invoked for the same. As regards the action proposed, the notice is vague and ambiguous inasmuch as it only says that action will be taken against the petitioner under law. In a case of this nature, according to me, there shall be an inspection of the property by the competent authority with notice to the indictee. A mahazar of the land from where earth was removed, with sufficient particulars so as to enable one to ascertain the quantity of the earth removed shall be prepared. The notice should certainly refer to the mahazar. It should state the quantity of the earth removed, the nature of the action proposed, the particulars of the dues to be recovered and also the power invoked for the same. If the aforesaid particulars are not furnished to the party concerned in the notice, I have no doubt that in our social scenario, the orders would be received by surprise by the party concerned. Insofar as the notice aforesaid does not contain the necessary particulars, it has to be found necessarily that the same does not conform to the requirements of the principles of natural justice.”

2. Though Ext.P8 notice has been issued, wherein the details, that were directed to be furnished as per Ext.P5 judgment, have been provided, a perusal of Ext.P5 would reveal that there is no adjudication done in the present case. Therefore, I am inclined to interfere with Ext.P8 and that a fresh adjudication shall be done by the 1^st respondent-Geologist.

3. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of as follows: Ext.P8 notice shall be treated as a provisional notice, to which the petitioner may submit his objection and after proper adjudication of the matter, fresh orders shall be passed by the 1^st respondent, taking into consideration the directions in Ext.P5 judgment. A decision in this regard shall be taken within an outer limit of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Any proceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P8 shall remain stayed till a fresh adjudication is made as directed above.

Sd/-