ORDER 1. Heard on the question of admission. 2. In this petition under article 226 of the constitution of India, the petitioner is aggrieved by show-cause notice dated 9.11.2017 issued by the respondents whereby, petitioner has been asked to explain as to why the disciplinary proceedings be not initiated and services be not terminated. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the cause of action, the show-cause notice issued against the petitioner has already been replied on 13.11.2017 which is part of P-7 at page No. 32 but respondents again issued show-cause notice which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is regular employee and in case, it was found that he is involved in the misconduct then regular disciplinary inquiry be conducted under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules 1966 but the same has not been done. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State submits that petition is not maintainable against the show-cause notice and prayed for dismissal of it. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. It is an admitted position that on the same allegations contained in first show cause notice, second notice was issued on 26.11.2018. The first show cause notice was duly replied by the petitioner therefore, without considering the reply of the petitioner no second show cause notice could be issued. 7. Under these circumstances, considering the fact that without giving finding on the reply submitted by the petitioner to the first show cause notice, second show cause notice containing the same allegations has been issued, therefore, second show cause notice dated 26.11.2018 is set aside and respondents are free to take action on the first show cause notice dated 9.11.2017 after considering the reply of the petitioner in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of