JUDGMENT ANTONY DOMINIC, J. – The challenge in these writ petitions is against exhibits P3, P5 and P6 orders passed by the first respondent levying penalty on the respective petitioners exercising powers under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The limited ground on which these orders are challenged is one of violation of principles of natural justice. In W.P. (C) No. 34334 of 2007, exhibit P1 is the notice that has been issued. Similar notice has been issued to the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 34387 of 2007 also. In the notice itself it is shown that reliance is placed on reports received from the sales tax authorities of State of Tamil Nadu and it is on that basis that C forms furnished by the petitioners have been described to be bogus. According to the petitioners, the purchasing dealer who issued the declarations had registration at least at the point of time when these were issued. In view of this, the petitioners made requests in their reply for disclosure of the reports that are relied on against them. However, without furnishing those reports, penalty has been levied by the impugned orders. The request of the petitioners for disclosure of the reports relied on against them has been turned down on the basis that the first respondent did not think it necessary to concede to the request made. It is in this background on the limited ground that exhibits P3, P5 and P6 in these cases are vitiated for non-disclosure of the materials that are relied on, writ petitions have been filed. The learned Government Pleader defends the impugned order contending that to the extent that it was necessary and relied on against them, contents of the reports have been disclosed to the petitioners. On this basis, learned Government Pleader submits that there has not been any violation of the principles of natural justice. What is disclosed to the petitioners in these cases is shown in exhibit P1 notices issued to them. These notices only contain certain reference numbers of the reports that are relied on and contents of the reports are not disclosed. Therefore, it is evident that in this case, penalty has been imposed on the petitioners relying on certain materials which were not disclosed to them despite requests that have been made by them. These notices only contain certain reference numbers of the reports that are relied on and contents of the reports are not disclosed. Therefore, it is evident that in this case, penalty has been imposed on the petitioners relying on certain materials which were not disclosed to them despite requests that have been made by them. This is in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. For that reason, exhibit P3 in W.P. (C) No. 34334 of 2007 and exhibits P5 and P6 in W.P. (C) No. 34387 of 2007 deserves to be quashed and I do so. The first respondent is directed to disclose the reports that are relied on against the petitioners, or at least its contents mentioned in exhibit P1 notices in these cases and after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, re-consider the matter and pass fresh orders. This the first respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible. Writ petitions are disposed of as above.