Removal based on complaints without notice or opportunity to respond violates natural justice.

The petitioner challenged orders dated 25 September 2025 and 18 November 2025 removing the petitioner from the positions of Member and Honorary Joint Secretary of the Coimbatore District Christian Women Aid Society.

The first order relied on ten complaints.

The petitioner alleged that the action was retaliatory for a complaint made against certain Society officials and that no opportunity to respond had been given before removal.

The petitioner sought to have the orders quashed and the matter reconsidered.

1. Whether the removal orders could stand when the petitioner had not been given notice of the complaints or an opportunity to respond before removal.

2. Whether the matter should be remitted to the first respondent for reconsideration after disclosure of the complaints and receipt of the petitioner’s response.

The Court applied the principles of natural justice, particularly the requirement that a person affected by an adverse decision be given notice of the case against them and a fair opportunity to respond.

The Court did not cite any statute or precedent; it considered the challenged orders in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The first respondent’s order identified ten complaints as the basis for removal, but the petitioner had not been put on notice or asked to provide an explanation before the decision was made.

The Court held that this omission was a blatant violation of natural justice.

It therefore set aside the orders without determining the merits of the allegations and directed the first respondent to disclose the complaints, allow sufficient time for a response, and reconsider the matter.

It remitted the matter to the first respondent, who must furnish copies of the complaints, provide the petitioner sufficient time to respond, and pass a speaking order within six weeks.

No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.