HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15053 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jitendra Prasad, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for Respondents. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Gram Panchayat Adhikari on 21.11.2021 at Block- Bisalpur, District Pilibhit and currently he is posted in District-Sitapur since August-2022. With respect to certain allegations sought to be leveled, a complaint stood lodged before the U.P. Lokayukt which culminated into an order dated 15.12.2023 holding the writ petitioner to be guilty and thereafter on 06.06.2024, an order came to be passed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Sitapur whereby one increment was withheld with non-cumulative effect and further an adverse entry was awarded against which the writ petitioner claims to have preferred Writ-A No. 11357 of 2024 which was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy by way of the appeal and the appeal came to be dismissed on 12.09.2024 the time barred against which a revision came to be preferred which is pending. 3. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that once the writ petitioner's representation is pending then in the circumstances, it is not justifiable for lodging of a first information report, particularly, when one Vinod Kumar who bears animosity with the writ petitioner is continuously corresponding and exerting pressure for lodging of the first information report and in this regard, the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Pilibhit on 12.08.2025 had directed the Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat), Block Puranpur, District Pilibhit to lodged a first information report else Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Astitva Srivastava, Pankaj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Jitendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) departmental proceedings have been initiated against him. Submission is that there is no such provision under law for directing or forcing for lodging of the first information report. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of this Court in Writ-A No. 47229 of 2017 (Dayanand Singh Chauhan and another v. State of U.P. and 4 others). 4. Sri Jitendra Prasad, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that whatever might be no cause of action has arisen till date as only correspondence has been made for lodging of the first information report which would not cloth any cause of action to the writ petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully. 6. Apparently, on the basis of the complaint, the matter traveled to Lokayukt whereby on 15.12.2023, an order came to be passed whereby departmental proceeding was directed to be continued and first information report to be lodged and thereafter an order came to be passed on 06.06.2024 by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Sitapur withholding increments with non- cumulative effect and also adverse entry against which an appeal came to be preferred which was dismissed and a revision has been preferred which is pending. Since the communication dated 12.08.2025 requires the latter from the former to lodge a first information report, thus, in the opinion of the Court, it would not be appropriate in the facts and circumstances to interfere at this stage as once the first information report is lodged and anything prejudicial is done then it is always open for the writ petitioner to question the same at an appropriate forum by way of appropriate remedy, particularly, there is nothing on record to shown that the order of Lokayukt has been stayed or set aside. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off. October 7, 2025 A. Prajapati WRIA No. 15053 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad