IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20683 of 2008 Date of Decision: August 06, 2010 Kulwinder Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. When the matter was taken up on 9.12.2008, the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the show cause notice Annexure P6 is absolutely vague as it does not disclose as to what petitioner has to show cause against. Learned counsel further submits that in the absence of any reasons spelt out in the show cause notice, the petitioner is prejudiced in filing any effective reply. Notice of motion to the respondents for 16.12.2008. Notice re: stay also.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondent- CWP No.20683 of 2008 [2] State contends that a specific show cause notice would be issued to the petitioner whereby the petitioner would be given time and liberty to file his response. 3. In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent-State, this petition is disposed of. 4. The respondent-State would have the liberty of giving a specific show cause notice to the petitioner while giving sufficient time to the petitioner to file reply thereto. The respondents, on consideration of the reply and material placed on record with the reply, would take final decision and convey the same to the petitioner. 5. In view of the above, Annexure P-6 is hereby quashed. It is directed that status-quo shall be maintained till decision is taken by the respondent authorities. (AJAI LAMBA) August 06, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?