JUDGMENT : AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J. 1. Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Advocate, has filed his power of attorney on behalf of the respondents which is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, does not deny that no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner before the impugned punishment order was passed. He still, however, opposes the claim of the petitioner. 3. There being a statutory provision, i.e. Regulation 7 (a) of the Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited Employees (Punishment and Appeals) Regulation, 2006, that even a minor penalty shall not be imposed on an employee unless he has been given a show cause notice thereof and a reasonable opportunity of making a representation there-against, this petition is allowed to the extent that the impugned orders, Annexures P-5 and P-7, are quashed, with liberty to the competent authority amongst the respondents to pass a fresh order, after issuing a show cause notice as regards the proposed punishment (if it is so proposed), in terms of the aforesaid Regulation. 4. The issue of limitation (if any) shall not come in the way of the authority concerned, while issuing such show cause notice.