1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 585 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 130 OF 2010 Shri Satu Shanu Parab Gaonkar Attorney of Comunidade of Bicholim with office at Gaonkarwada, Bicholim Goa. Son of late Shanu Govind Parab Gaonkar age 56 years, married, teacher, resident of H.No.2418, Vasudev Nagar, Bicholim Goa. ... Petitioner V e r s u s Government of Goa & 5 others. ... Respondents Mr. A. Kansar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. M. Salkar, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : A. S. OKA & F. M. REIS, JJ. DATED : 12 th AUGUST, 2010. P.C.: The challenge in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the show cause notice dated 7th June, 2010 issued to the Petitioner by the Administrator of Communidades of North Zone. The show cause notice calls upon the Petitioner to explain as to why he should not be suspended from the post of Attorney of Communidade of Bicholim. 2 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has invited attention of the Court to the communication dated 23rd March, 2010 issued by the Mamlatdar in Collectorate, North Goa District, Panaji, inviting our attention to what is stated in the communication. He submitted that in view of what is stated therein, the Administrator of the Communidade will have no choice but to take action under Article 74 of the Code of Communidade. He pointed out that the communication dated 23rd March, 2010 suggests that the charge of the Petitioner be handed over to the substitute Attorney. 3. After having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, we find all that the communication dated 23rd March, 2010 directs that the action should be initiated under Article 74 of the Code of Communidade. What is stated in the communication dated 23rd March, 2010 and especially in first paragraph cannot be construed as a direction to the Administrator to take action under Article 74 of the Code of Communidade. It is a direction limited to initiating proceedings. 4. The show cause notice has to be decided on its own merits after considering the reply of the Petitioner. It is obvious 3 that the Administrator will have to come to the conclusion on merits independently of what is observed in the letter dated 23rd March, 2010. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, at this stage, pointed out that apart from the aforesaid communication of Mamlatdar, the other communications issued on 24th December, 2009 by the Under Secretary ( Revenue) and 19th March, 2010 by the Collector are relied upon in the show cause notice. We have already observed above that the show cause notice will have to be decided by the Administrator on its own merits without being influenced by what is stated in the communications referred to in the show cause notice. 5. In view of what is observed above, at this stage, we find that it is not necessary to entertain the Writ Petition. Subject to clarification issued above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. All the contentions of the Petitioner are expressly kept open. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petition, Civil Application is disposed of. A. S. OKA, J F. M. REIS, J at*