Judgment M. Jaichandren, J. 1. Heard Mr.A.John Vincent, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.R.Murali, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings, dated 02.09.2014, issued by the second respondent, asking the petitioner to remove the fence, said to have been put up by her, encroaching upon the space earmarked for the formation of a park and for the construction of shops. By the impugned proceedings, dated 02.09.2014, the petitioner has been directed to remove the fence within three days from the date of receipt of the said notice. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that no notice had been issued to the petitioner asking her to show cause as to why the fence, said to have been put up by her, in S.No.44/2, 3A, 3B, in Ward No.18, Ponmeni Village, Madurai District, should not be directed to be removed. The petitioner had not been given any opportunity to show that the land in question is a patta land belonging to her. However, the second respondent had issued the impugned proceedings without following the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned proceedings is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the impugned proceedings issued by the second respondent, dated 02.09.2014, may be treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner may be directed to submit her explanation, within a time limit specified by this Court. Thereafter, the second respondent would pass appropriate orders considering the explanation to be submitted by the petitioner. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and even though the impugned proceedings had been issued by the second respondent, to the husband of the petitioner, from the affidavit filed in this writ petition, it is found that the property in question, in S.No.44/2, 3A, 3B, in Ward No.18, Ponmeni Village, Madurai District, stands in the name of the petitioner, we find it appropriate to direct the petitioner to submit her explanation to the impugned proceedings, dated 02.09.2014, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such explanation to be submitted by the petitioner, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks thereafter. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.