ORDER : H.G. Ramesh, J. 1. What are the requirements of a notice in public law? As this question has already been answered by this Court in Sinha S.N. v. The State of Kar. ILR 2012 Kar 448, validity of the notice impugned in this writ petition will have to be examined in the light of the said decision. 2. By consent of Learned Counsel on both sides, the petition is heard on merits and is being disposed of by this order. In this writ petition, petitioner-Society is challenging the notice dated 31.08.2015 issued by the District Registrar of Societies, Vijayapura, under Rule 8 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Rules, 1961. The notice states that the working of the society is contrary to law and that the information furnished by it is not correct. The notice further states that an enquiry is proposed to be held under Section 25(1) of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 relating to working of the society, and if the petitioner-Society wants to state anything, it may do so within seven days. 3. Except what is stated above, the notice does not contain any specific allegation against the petitioner-Society. The notice does not state as to why the working of the society is contrary to law. It also does not state which information furnished by the society is not correct. What to reply when there is no specific allegation? 4. A proper notice is an essential requirement of natural justice. The requirements of a notice in public law is stated by this Court in Sinha S.N. v. The State of Kar. (supra), in the following words: "4. .... When a notice can be said to be valid in law? The term 'Notice' originated from the Latin word 'Notitia' which means 'being known'. It is equivalent to information, intelligence or knowledge. Notice is the starting point of any hearing. The right to fair hearing covers every stage through which an administrative adjudication passes, starting from notice to final determination. Notice embodies rule of fairness and must precede an adverse order. It should clearly state the reason as to why a party is required to appear and/or his reply is required. The party concerned should be apprised of the evidence on which the case against him is based and be given an opportunity to rebut the said evidence. Notice embodies rule of fairness and must precede an adverse order. It should clearly state the reason as to why a party is required to appear and/or his reply is required. The party concerned should be apprised of the evidence on which the case against him is based and be given an opportunity to rebut the said evidence. A notice, to be valid in law, should be clear and precise so as to give the party concerned adequate information of the case he has to meet. The adequacy of notice is a relative term and must be decided with reference to each case. The test of adequacy of notice will be whether it gives sufficient information so as to enable the person concerned to put up an effective defence. If a notice is vague or it contains unspecified or unintelligible allegations, it would imply a denial of proper opportunity of being heard. Natural justice is not only a requirement of proper legal procedure but also a vital element of good administration." (Emphasis supplied) 5. In the light of the law laid down by this Court in the above decision, the impugned notice dated 31.08.2015 is unsustainable in law as it does not contain any specific allegation against the petitioner-Society. It is accordingly set-aside. 6. For having made the petitioner-Society to unnecessarily spend money to approach this Court, the respondent is directed to pay costs of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand). The respondent shall deposit the costs with this Court within four weeks from today. On such deposit, the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the same. The State Government shall be entitled for reimbursement of the costs from the officer who issued the impugned notice. 7. I have come across many notices issued by Government officers/statutory authorities in exercise of statutory powers. Many of them were vague and without any specific allegation against whom the notice was issued. Such an exercise of power results in harassment to the person concerned. The officer or authority responsible for issuance of such a notice shall be liable for 'misfeasance in public office', and consequently, shall have to compensate the person concerned for the loss suffered and costs incurred for redressal. 8. It is necessary for the officers/authorities to know the requirements of a valid notice in public law. The officer or authority responsible for issuance of such a notice shall be liable for 'misfeasance in public office', and consequently, shall have to compensate the person concerned for the loss suffered and costs incurred for redressal. 8. It is necessary for the officers/authorities to know the requirements of a valid notice in public law. Accordingly, the Registrar General of this Court shall send a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, to circulate it to all officers and statutory authorities in the State who are conferred with the power to issue notices under various State enactments and Rules. Petition disposed of.