Writ interference with show-cause notices is improper when disputed facts require first recourse to the statutory authority.

A writ petition under Article 226 is ordinarily not maintainable against a show-cause notice issued by a competent statutory authority when the challenge depends on disputed questions of fact and the notice is not ex facie without jurisdiction. Where the controversy concerns entitlement to premises and the basis of occupation, the affected party should first raise objections before the authority and allow the statutory process to proceed. Judicial interference at the notice stage is unwarranted unless the notice is a patent nullity. The High Court erred in quashing the notice and eviction proceedings without permitting adjudication of the disputed facts by the statutory authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Article 226 was maintainable against a show-cause notice issued by the competent authority under the Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982, when the challenge depended on disputed questions of fact and the aggrieved party had not first submitted its objections before the statutory authority.

Analysis: The notice was issued by a statutory competent authority under Section 59 of the Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982 for alleged unauthorised occupation of Board premises. The core controversy was whether the premises still belonged to the Board or had already vested in the allottee, and whether the first respondent was occupying under the Board or under the allottee. Those questions went to the very basis of the authority's jurisdiction and required factual investigation. The notice was not shown to be a patent nullity or wholly without jurisdiction on its face. In such circumstances, the proper course was to raise objections before the authority, allow the statutory process to proceed, and, if necessary, challenge any adverse decision in appropriate proceedings thereafter.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable at that stage and the High Court erred in quashing the notice and the eviction proceedings without permitting the statutory authority to adjudicate the disputed facts.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court should ordinarily not interfere at the stage of a show-cause notice issued by a competent statutory authority where the challenge turns on disputed facts and the notice is not ex facie without jurisdiction; the affected party must first avail the statutory remedy before the authority concerned.

---