Defective show cause notice may be quashed, yet fresh proceedings can still be initiated when merits remain open.

A show cause notice issued under Rule 58 for alleged violation of Section 70(5)(b) was found not to conform to the Act and Rules, so its quashing was upheld. However, setting aside the notice did not decide the underlying merits, and the competent authority was left free to initiate fresh proceedings by issuing a new show cause notice in accordance with law. The merits of the controversy remained expressly open.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show cause notice issued under Rule 58 for alleged violation of Section 70(5)(b) was not in conformity with the Act and Rules, and whether liberty ought to have been reserved to issue a fresh notice.

Analysis: The High Court's finding that the show cause notice was infirm and not in conformity with the statutory framework was upheld. At the same time, setting aside the notice did not conclude the controversy on merits, and the competent authority should have been left free to initiate fresh proceedings by issuing a fresh show cause notice in accordance with law. The merits of the underlying controversy were expressly left open.

Conclusion: The quashing of the show cause notice was maintained, but the order was modified to grant liberty to issue a fresh show cause notice and proceed afresh in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a show cause notice is set aside for non-conformity with the governing statute and rules, the authority may be left at liberty to issue a fresh notice so long as the merits remain undecided.

---