JUDGMENT : The petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 11.09.2015 passed by the State Human Rights Commission, Jharkhand in Suo-motu Cognizance Case No.16 of 2013 and he has also challenged the charge-memo appended with letter dated 07.02.2017 and show-cause notice dated 21.03.2017. 2. At the outset, the learned State counsel has raised an objection to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that two different cause of action have been clubbed together. 3. While subject for challenging order dated 11.09.2015 would fall under W.P.(C), orders dated 07.02.2017 and 21.03.2017 can be challenged by filing writ petition labelled as W.P.(S). 4. Reserving a right with the petitioner to challenge order dated 11.09.2015 passed in Suo-motu Cognizance Case No.16 of 2013 in a separate proceeding, prayer at Clause 1(i) is held not maintainable in the present proceeding. 5. Insofar as challenge to charge-memo/ charge-sheet in a writ proceeding is concerned, normally the writ court would not interfere in the matter at the threshold. In “Union of India & Anr Vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana” reported in (2006) 12 SCC 28 , the Supreme Court has held thus: “13. It is well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that ordinarily no writ lies against a charge-sheet or show-cause notice vide Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board v. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Special Director v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse, Ulagappa v. Divisional Commr., Mysore, State of U.P. v. Brahm Datt Sharma, etc. 14. The reason why ordinarily a writ petition should not be entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet is that at that stage the writ petition may be held to be premature. A mere charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any cause of action, because it does not amount to an adverse order which affects the rights of any party unless the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction to do so. It is quite possible that after considering the reply to the show-cause notice or after holding an enquiry the authority concerned may drop the proceedings and/or hold that the charges are not established. It is well-settled that a writ petition lies when some right of any party is infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not infringe the right of anyone. It is well-settled that a writ petition lies when some right of any party is infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not infringe the right of anyone. It is only when a final order imposing some punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, that the said party can be said to have any grievance. 15. Writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and hence such discretion under Article 226 should not ordinarily be exercised by quashing a show-cause notice or charge-sheet. 16. No doubt, in some very rare and exceptional cases the High Court can quash a charge-sheet or show-cause notice if it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some other reason if it is wholly illegal. However, ordinarily the High Court should not interfere in such a matter.” 6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge charge-memo dated 07.02.2017 and show-cause notice dated 21.03.2017 in the event challenge to order passed by the State Human Rights Commission, Jharkhand in Suo-motu Cognizance Case No.16 of 2013 is set aside. 7. The writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty as prayed for.