Show Cause Notice Validity: disclosure of investigation material and tentative findings did not establish pre-determination.

A show cause notice is not liable to be quashed merely because it does not expressly state that the authority's findings are tentative. Where the notice discloses the materials gathered in investigation, the factual basis of the proposed action, and the conclusions reached so far, that disclosure is sufficient to enable an effective reply. A writ court will ordinarily interfere only if there is lack of jurisdiction or a clear final determination already made against the noticee. On the stated facts, the record did not show a pre-determined decision, so the challenge to the notice failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show cause notice disclosed a pre-determined conclusion and was liable to be quashed as an empty formality.

Analysis: The notice set out the materials collected during investigation, the factual basis of the proposed action, and the tentative conclusions reached so far. Disclosure of the incriminating material was necessary to enable an effective reply. The mere absence of an express statement that the findings were tentative did not convert the notice into a final adjudication. A writ court will not ordinarily quash a show cause notice unless lack of jurisdiction or a clear final determination is shown, and the materials on record did not establish that the authority had finally decided the issue against the petitioner.

Conclusion: The show cause notice was not shown to be pre-determined or invalid, and the petition for quashing it failed.

---