' Through this Constitutional petition the petitioner seeks quashment of show-cause notice dated 4-7-2002 which has been issued to him under E&D Rules, 1999.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were appointed as PTC Teacher on 4-9-1995. Who were removed from service but the Punjab Service Tribunal vide judgment dated 31-10-2001 which was upheld by the Supreme Court directed to reinstate the petitioner. However, it was mentioned therein that the department can initiate the proceedings under E&D Rules 1999. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No,8792 of 2002 in this Court which was disposed of by this Court by directing the respondents to treat the petitioners under E&D Rules, 1999 as is directed by the Punjab Service Tribunal.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that issuance of show-cause notice is on the allegation of misconduct but the matters which have been referred to in the show-cause notice relate to before the joining of the service by the petitioners. It is further contended that the purpose and intend of the show-cause notice is contrary to the factual dispute and the judgment passed by the Punjab Service Tribunal. It is further contended that the petitioners have a right to be treated in accordance with law and issuance of show-cause notice based on irrelevant facts. He has relied on the following cases: ' PLD 1962 (WP) Lah. 935; 1993 SCMR 603; 2000 PLC (C.S.) 937; 1992 SCMR 1134; 1998 CLC 1890 and 1986 SCMR 790.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents attached with this petition. The case-law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. The issuance of a show-cause notice is not an adverse action but is a step towards the passing of a final order which is challengeable before the Punjab Service, Tribunal and this Court cannot entertain the writ petition due to the bar contained under Article 212 of the Constitution. Even otherwise issuance of show-cause notice under E&D Rules relates to the terms and conditions of a civil servant. I am fortified in this view by the dictum laid down in the following judgments: ' 1994 SCMR 2232; 1998 .PLC (C.S.) 70 and 1213; 1998 PLC (C.S.) 607; 1997 SCMR 1508 = 1997 PLC (C.S.)
971 and 1998 PLC (C.S.) 931.
' This petition due to the above said reasons is not maintainable which is dismissed.