Show cause notice under disciplinary rules was premature where conviction-based action awaited a final administrative decision.

A writ challenge to a show cause notice issued under Rule 19 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 was treated as premature because the disciplinary process had not reached finality and the enquiry officer's report was still pending before the disciplinary authority. Rule 19 permits a special procedure where a criminal conviction, including for corruption offences, can justify action without the regular enquiry under Rules 14 and 18. At the notice stage, the competent authority had only sought an explanation before taking a final decision, so no concluded prejudice was shown. The challenge to the notice therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition challenging a show cause notice issued under Rule 19 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, on the basis of a criminal conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, was premature and liable to be interfered with.

Analysis: The disciplinary enquiry initiated under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 had not reached finality because the enquiry officer's report was still to be considered by the disciplinary authority. Separately, the petitioner had been convicted for corruption offences, though the sentence stood suspended in appeal. Rule 19 provides a special procedure where a conviction permits the competent authority to proceed without following the regular enquiry process under Rules 14 and 18, and the show cause notice merely called for an explanation before a final decision. At the stage of notice, no concluded prejudice could be said to have arisen, and the tribunal had not committed any manifest error in treating the original application as premature.

Conclusion: The challenge to the show cause notice was premature and the writ petition failed.

---