A MADHU Vs. TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned demand letters had been issued, on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, asking the petitioners to pay the additional 25% development cost, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. THErefore, he had prayed that this Court may be pleased to set aside the said demand letters, issued to the petitioners and direct the second respondent to pass appropriate orders, in respect of the amounts liable to be paid by the petitioners, if any, as developmental cost, after giving them an opportunity of hearing. 2. THE learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents had not been in a position to show that the petitioners had been given an opportunity of hearing, before the impugned demand letters had been issued. 3. In such circumstances, the impugned demand letters are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the second respondent, to pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, with regard to the additional developmental cost to be paid to the petitioners, after giving them an opportunity of hearing. THE second respondent shall pass such orders, as expeditiously as possible. THEse Writ Petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs.