ORDER : The petitioner is aggrieved against the two show-cause notices issued by the first respondent dated 19.12.2015, wherein and whereby the petitioner was called upon to show-cause on or before 28.12.2015 as to why the appointment of the petitioner as Poojari through proceedings dated 30.04.2012 shall not be cancelled. In another show-cause notice, the hereditary trustee was called upon to submit a report as to why an order shall not be passed for keeping the conduct of poojas in abeyance pending disposal of civil suits. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials placed before this Court. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned proceedings though styled as a show-cause notice, in effect is a pre-determined order and therefore, there is no purpose in going before the first respondent and giving explanation to the impugned show-cause notice. In support of such contention, the learned counsel invited the attention of this Court to various observations made in the show-cause notices by the first respondent. She also submitted that the first respondent is not having jurisdiction to issue the show-cause notices as against the petitioner. 4. Insofar as the jurisdiction point raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is concerned, I am not able to agree with her submission in view of the fact that the very appointment of the petitioner was issued by the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai through proceedings dated 30.04.2012, which alone is sought to be cancelled through one of the show-cause notices issued by the very same official. Therefore, the learned counsel is not justified in her contention that the first respondent is not having jurisdiction, having enjoyed the benefit derived out of such order dated 30.04.2012 all these years. 5. While coming to the next submission that the impugned show-cause notices are issued with pre determined mind is concerned, no doubt the first respondent has made some adverse remarks and observation against the petitioner in show-cause notices. Needless to say that when the first respondent has chosen to issue a show-cause notice whatever the observation or allegation that are made in the impugned proceedings would have to be construed only as a prima facie allegation and not as a final conclusion by the authority, who issued the show-cause notices. Needless to say that when the first respondent has chosen to issue a show-cause notice whatever the observation or allegation that are made in the impugned proceedings would have to be construed only as a prima facie allegation and not as a final conclusion by the authority, who issued the show-cause notices. Certainly, the objections raised by the petitioner in response to the show-cause notices have to be considered in detail and thereafter only, the first respondent can come to a final conclusion in respect of the subject matter allegation. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner is not well founded. Accordingly, I find that this Court cannot interfere with the show-cause notices issued against the petitioner, as it is for the petitioner to give objection to the said show- cause notices explaining all the grounds raised in this writ petition as well. It is well settled that as against the show-cause notice which is issued by the competent authority, a writ would not lie and the petitioner has to only approach the authority, who issued the show-cause notice and give explanation to the same. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed, however, with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the first respondent and give his explanation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such objections from the petitioner, the first respondent shall consider the allegation made against the petitioner and the objections raised by the petitioner and thereafter, to pass the order independently on merits and in accordance with law uninfluenced by any of the observations made in the show-cause notice, within a period of six weeks, thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.