Judgment :- 1. Writ Petitions are filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent, pertaining to the Circular in Na.Ka.No.364/2012/A3 dated 14.3.2012 and quash the same. 2. The prayer in all the five writ petitions is one and the same. By consent, all the five writ petitions are taken up together for final disposal. 3. All the five petitioners claimed to be the owners of agricultural land and they are drawing water from the well situate in the property by using oil engine for the purpose of supplying drinking water on payment of meagre amount to the benefit of villagers who do not have water facility. This is objected to by some disgruntled villagers and they have given complaint to the first respondent District Collector which resulted in the passing of impugned order under challenge. 4. Thiru Valliappan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners pleads that the order under challenge has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, as no opportunity was given to the petitioners to explain the charge on the basis of which the impugned order has been passed. He also states that the second respondent Commissioner is not the competent authority to take action and there is no provision of law empowering him to take action. On this premise, the writ petition was canvassed. 5. Thiru A.Navaneetha krishnan, learned Advocate General assisted by Ms.M.E.Rani Selvam, appearing on behalf of the second respondent, contended that in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Central Ground Water Authority and the powers conferred in terms of Section 4 of the Environment Protection Act 1986, the District Collector has taken note of the complaints made by public, has asked the second respondent to take proper action. He further relies upon G.O.Ms.No.52 Public Works (R2) Department dated 2.3.2012 where it has been specifically stated that the Panchayat Union, Senthamangalam of Namakkal District, falls under the category of over exploited area in terms of ground water resource. Annexure III-F of the G.O. is referred to for emphasize the said plea. Learned Advocate General on instruction states that the action was taken as an emergency measure considering the large number of complaints. Annexure III-F of the G.O. is referred to for emphasize the said plea. Learned Advocate General on instruction states that the action was taken as an emergency measure considering the large number of complaints. However, since the plea of violation of principles of natural justice has been raised by the petitioners, the District Collector can be directed to hear the petitioners and take a final decision in this matter after giving further notice by including the materials now placed before this Court. The impugned proceedings and further notice can be treated as a show-cause notice so as to enable the petitioners to give their reply and the same will be considered by the Collector and final orders will be passed on merits. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly states that the petitioners may be given 15 days time after receipt of the further notice by the District Collector to submit their objections to the District Collector. The District Collector after taking steps as above, will take a final decision within 10 days thereafter. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes not to extract and sell water till such time, the Collector passes final order either way. 7. The above submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Advocate General are recorded. At this point of time, and in view of the direction as above, this court is not inclined to go into the merits of the legal plea taken by the petitioners as to the power of the second respondent who initiated action. 8. In the result, treating the impugned proceedings as show-cause notice, the petitioners are permitted to give their reply to the District Collector, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of further notice. On receipt of reply from the petitioners, the District Collector shall take a final decision within ten days thereafter. Till such time, the District Collector passes a final order, petitioners should not extract and sell water. The petitioners are entitled to make a request to the District Collector for return of the seized articles and the same shall be considered by the District Collector at the time of the proceedings. 9. The Writ Petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.