(^(Wl/~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARHl W. P. N0. ^8 7-0F2004 PETITIONBR Kum. Reena Rai, D/o Shri J.N.Rai,aged about 42 years, Occupation - Service, posted Clerk - currf- Cashier, Bastar Kshetriya Grainin Bank, Nangur Branch, Dist. Bastar [Jagdalpur] - Chhattisgarh VERSUS ^^ ^^^ ^.^,^"^" ^'^ ••••••'' *•,r' is.^'i^5^, RESPONDENTS 1. Bastar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, A Regional Rural Bank Constituted under Regional Rural Bank Act 1976 through ..-•^^irf- Its Chairman, Head Office Hat Cachora, Jagdalpur District Bastar [Chhattisgarh] 2. Chairman, Bastar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, being the Disciplinary Authority, H. O. Hat Cachora, Jagdalpur District Bastar [Chhattisgarh] 3. Shri Sanatan Ram Nag, Enquiiy OfEcer, Bastar Kshetriya Gramin Bank,H.O. Hat Cachora, Jagdalpur District Bast^r [Ch^ttisgarh] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE ^26/22f7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR^ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS. DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERS: The petitioner—a.boun— ?-'.^'<sa^, 'csaii^sas. "»tltn£f^'/^° "y HIGH_CQURT_QF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR • Writ Petition No. 282 of 2004 Petitioner Kum. Reena Rai Versus Respondents - Bastar Kshetriya Gramin Bank &, others Writ Petition Under Article 226/227 QfThe.Constitytion Oflndia (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate with Shri Akhilesh Dalpati, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri B. D. Guru, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER (Oralt ( Passed on this 23rd day of March, 2010 ) Heard. 1. By this pedtion, the petidoner seeks to challenge the show cause notice dated 29.11.2003 (Annexure P/13), whereby after departmental enquiry the show cause notice, proposing punishment was issued. The petitioner, instead of filing reply to the show cause notice has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to quash the show cause notice dated 29.11.2003. 2. The petitioner has filed her reply to the show cause notice on 20.12.2003 ( filed alongwith I.A.No. 1514/2004). 3. Law is well settled that after departmental enquiry a second show cause notice may be issued proposing punishment. The petitioner/delinquent employee is expected to file reply to the second show cause notice also and thereafter an order is passed. Show cause notice after completion of the departmental enquiry does not create a cause of action as the show cause notice itself is not an order which has an adverse effect on any aspect of the career of an employee. Thus, for want of cause of action, writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable, being premature. Thus, the writ petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. 4. . The'petitioner has already filed the reply to the show cause notice on 20.12.2003, which raay be taken into consideradon by the disciplinary authority before passing the final order. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge