IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 12807 of 2009 Date of decision: 31.8.2009. Radha Krishan ….. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others ….. Respondents Present: Mr. Manoj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. **** S.S. SARON, J. The writ petition has been filed for setting aside the notice dated 16.7.2009 (Annexure P1) issued by the District Collector, Roopnagar. A perusal of the notice dated 16.7.2009 (Annexure P1) would show that a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner under Rule 16(i)(a) and 16(ii)(a) of the Punjab Land Revenue Rules to show cause for the reasons noticed therein why the petitioner should not be removed from the post of Lambardar. The reply has been asked to be furnished within 15 days. The reason for the termination is that it has been intimated by one Sh. Tek Chand son of Babu Ram that the petitioner has been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh vide order dated 14.8.1997 for the offences under Section 376(2)(a) and 376(2) (b) of the Indian Penal Code and apart from this, he has also been sentenced for other offences. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of his conviction in the High Court which has been dismissed on 16.11.2005. Therefore, the complainant had requested for terminating the petitioner from the post of CWP No. 12807 of 2009 [2] Lambardar. The petitioner has filed his reply dated 10.8.2009 (Annexure P3) to the show cause notice dated 16.7.2009. The reply has been filed on 10.8.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that against the order passed by the High Court, the petitioner has filed SLP (Crl.) No. 6782 of 2006 in which the Supreme Court on 19.2.2007 has granted leave to appeal. Therefore, it is submitted that in view of the fact that leave to appeal has been granted, the show cause notice (Annexure P1) is liable to be quashed. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he would be satisfied if the reply (Annexure P3) submitted by the petitioner is considered expeditiously. In the circumstance, he prays that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition. Dismissed as withdrawn. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE August 31, 2009 amit