Judgment :- Heard Mr.K.S.Duraipandi the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned notice, dated 13. 1999, issued by the second respondent for the recovery of water charges from the petitioner. 3. The main contention of the petitioner is that the water connection to the petitioners premises bearing door No.3, Kurban Ali Khan Street, Chennai, had been given by the respondents only in the year 1997. However, the impugned notice, dated 13. 1999, has directed the petitioner to pay the water charges from the year 1988-89. Therefore, the impugned notice, dated 13. 1999, is illegal and invalid in the eye of law. 4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents had submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to make a written representation to the second respondent raising the necessary objections to the impugned notice, dated 13. 1999. It was also submitted that till such orders are passed considering such representation, the respondents would not take any coercive action against these petitioner, as stated in the impugned notice, dated 13. 1999. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the second respondent raising his objections, within a period of four weeks from today, and on such representation being submitted, the second respondent is expected to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P.No.8107 of 1999 is closed.