JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Madhur Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondents no.2 & 4, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing of the Recovery Notice dated 9.7.2019 issued by the respondent no.4. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the fact that no agreement was entered into between the parties for the collection of vehicle parking fee and no work order being issued and yet the recovery notice has been issued under the order dated 9.7.2019 as arrears of dues. 4. At the very outset learned counsel for the respondent submits that till date no recovery certificate has been issued and therefore, if the petitioner has only been issued with the notice, he can submit a proper reply to be considered by the appropriate authority. 5. From the perusal of the documents as have been brought on record and the pleadings that have come to be raised, we fine that the petitioner has only represented the matter under the letter dated 12.7.2019, however we find nothing on record to demonstrate that the letter was ever got served upon the respondent competent authority. 6. In the interest of justice, we are disposing of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit a proper reply to the notice dated 9.7.2019 within a period of two weeks from today. In the event, if any such reply is submitted, the same shall be examined by the competent respondents, namely, respondent no.4, within a further period of four weeks. However, decision shall be taken before issuing any recovery certificate pursuant to the notice dated 9.7.2019. Needless to add, the order to be passed,shall be reasoned and speaking one.