JUDGMENT The petitioner is allotted telephone No. 31257 at his shop situated at Jail Road, Indore. The petitioner continued to pay the telephone bills regularly. On 29/30.08.85 the Divisional Engineer, Phones (ADMN) District Indore issued a show cause notice (Annexure-C) to the petitioner in terms of Art. 421 of the Indian Telegraphs Rules proposing to disconnect the telephone number and requiring the petitioner to show-cause within seven days of the issuance of the notice. This notice contained no reason for such an action. Aggrieved by this notice, the petitioner has filed this writ-petition, seeking quashment of the notice (Annexure-C). On 10.09.85, this Court passed the interim order restraining the respondents from disconnecting the telephone number. The Divisional Engineer, on behalf of all the respondents filed the return opposing the petition. I have heard both sides. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that show cause notice is without jurisdiction in that no notice is permitted under the law without recording the reasons in writing. He referred to Article 421 of the Indian Telegraphs Rules. This Article provides as under :- 421- "Where the Divisional Engineer is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it is necessary to do so, he may, after giving the subscriber a notice in writing for as period which shall not except in emergent cases be less than 7 days, disconnect the telephone, and in such case, the subscriber shall be entitled to refund of rent for the unexpired portion of the period for which the connection or service was given." Alongwith the return, the respondents have filed (Annexure R/4) to show that the consumer-petitioner has beaten the line-man Shri K.C. Morey and as such, in the absence of satisfactory reply in due time from the subscriber i.e. the petitioner, the telephone connection may be disconnected. The reasons contained in Annexure R/4 are, however, not disclosed in the show cause notice (Annexure-C). The validity of the action is required to be judged by the language used in the relevant document. In AIR 1990 SC 1984 (S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India) it is held that administrative action is also required to be supported by the reasons. This was not done. The aforesaid provision also mandates that the satisfaction has to depend on the reasons to be recorded in writing. In AIR 1990 SC 1984 (S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India) it is held that administrative action is also required to be supported by the reasons. This was not done. The aforesaid provision also mandates that the satisfaction has to depend on the reasons to be recorded in writing. Admittedly such is not the position as regards Annexure-C. In the result, Annexure C and R/4 are hereby quashed as being vitiated and infirm. However, it shall be open to the Divisional Engineer Phones (ADMN) to initiate proper action against the petitioner if the facts and law warranted such a course and for that purpose this order shall not come in the way because the notice has been quashed only as being not in conformity with Art. 421. The petition is thus, allowed in terms as indicated above with no orders as to costs. The amount of security cost, if any shall be refunded to the petitioner after due verification.