MP HC Quashes ₹4.63-Lakh Recovery Demand Against Water Committee President, Allows Fresh Action After Notice And Hearing

The petitioner, formerly President of the Water Management Committee, Madhopur, challenged an order dated 17 March 2020 and a demand notice requiring him to deposit ₹4.63 lakh in connection with alleged irregularities in the project

He contended that the respondents issued the order and demand without giving him a show-cause notice or an opportunity to be heard

The State maintained that notices had been issued, relying on documents filed with its return

On examination, the Court found that those documents called for payment but did not invite the petitioner to respond to the proposed recovery

An authority proposing an order with civil consequences must afford the affected person an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

A notice demanding payment, without inviting the person to explain or contest the proposed recovery, does not itself provide that opportunity

The Court applied this principle in exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution

The documents relied on by the State showed that the petitioner had been asked to deposit the amount, but they did not show that he had been invited to put forward his case against the proposed recovery

Because the proposed action had civil consequences, the Court held that the petitioner should have been heard before an adverse order was made.

The absence of that opportunity required the order and demand notice to be set aside

It left respondent No. 3 at liberty to proceed afresh after issuing a show-cause notice and complying with the principles of natural justice; the petition was disposed of on that basis