Judgment :- The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of Certiorari in calling for the records of the respondents 1 to 3 which resulted in the order of the fourth respondent dated 5.11.2002 made in proceedings No.AE/ (O&M)/Rural/Tiruchengode/R52/No.342/23/02-03 and the order of the fifth respondent in Letter No.AE/O&M/Chithalanthur/F.Notice/No.434/02 dated 8.1.2003 and quash the same. 2. It is seen from the averments made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the writ petition that a stand is taken on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents without following the due procedure specified under law, all of a sudden passed the impugned orders dated 5.11.2002, 3.12.2002 and 8.01.20033 even without prior notice by calling upon the individual members of the Society to show cause as to the basis of imposing such a consumption charges even without specifying the basis of the calculation, etc., in disregarding the principles of natural justice and consequently levied the consumption charges of Rs.250 per Horse Power per half yearly which was worked out for the first half of the year 2000 and thereafter arrived at a sum of Rs.76,503/-towards the total consumption of 105 Horse Power availed by the members of the Society, etc., 3. A perusal of the impugned notice dated 03.12.2002 by the fifth respondent, the Assistant Engineer (Operation & Maintenance), Tamil Nadu Electricity Department, Chithalanthur, Namakkal District addressed to the the President of the sixth respondent Society, Molasi Kooturavu Pasana Sangam, which was presently superseded shows that the sixth respondent was directed to pay the electricity charges as mentioned in the said notice of demand for the period ranging from 2000-2002, within seven days from the date of receipt of the same. 4. The contention of the petitioner seems to be that the principles of natural justice have been given the clear go by and not been adhered to by the respondents while passing the impugned orders and the principles of reasonableness or fairness has not been complied with which has resulted in the impugned orders being passed, quite in negation of the basic principle of audi alteram partem. 5. In this connection, it is to be borne in mind that the principles of natural justice are not the edicts of a statute and they are not to be embodied as a codified rules in a particular statute. 5. In this connection, it is to be borne in mind that the principles of natural justice are not the edicts of a statute and they are not to be embodied as a codified rules in a particular statute. The term Natural justice has not been defined anywhere. The term Natural justice means justice according to conscience and a reasonable order being passed after duly providing necessary and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the other side etc., Further the Natural justice is natural sense of what is right and wrong. The requirement of hearing both sides and arriving at a decision applies to the administrative orders also being passed by the departmental authorities passed by concern. 6. It is worth to recall the from seneca (about 4 B.C. -A.D.56) Philosopher who was tutor to Emperor Nero, mentions that both sides must be heard whoever should adjudge anything, the other party not having been heard: even though he should decide fairly, it would scarcely be fair 7. Inasmuch as that no opportunity was provided to the petitioner before the issuance of the impugned demand notice orders dated 5.11.2002, 3.12.2002 and 08.01.2003, this Court quashes the same and is of the considered view that the petitioner Society or its members should be given due opportunity of putting forth their objections or counter to the notices of the demand and in that view of the matter, allows the writ petition in furtherance of substantial cause of justice by issuing necessary direction to the Authorities to provide adequate opportunity to the petitioner society for putting forth their objections in written form and also after the receipt of the same, it is open to the authorities to pass necessary orders on merits in the manner known to law and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks. 8. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.