Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69637 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5817 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mayank Kumar Tiwari Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.B.N.Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Siddharth Singhal Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri A.B.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Maurya, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Siddharth Singhal, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, petitioner wants relief in the nature of certiorari to quash the entire disciplinary proceedings initiated against him with issuance of chargesheet served upon the petitioner vide covering letter dated 30.12.2024. 3. For assailing the entire disciplinary proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken two pleas:firstly, regarding Diploma in Computer hardware maintenance which is an O-Level certificate that was earlier obtained by the petitioner and furnished before the appointing authority, upon verification it was found to be correct as has come to be mentioned in the order of appointment dated09.11.2020 and only verification was required regarding B.Com. marksheet and certificate. Thus the condition was in the appointment order that it was being issued subject to the verification of B.Com Marksheet; and Secondly, the relevant service rules provide for O-Level Diploma in Computer Operation from an institute recognised by the Government and according to him NIELIT is the institute recognised by the Central Government for the purposes of disbursement of diploma certificates inasmuch as previously many appointments have been made of candidates having O-Level Diploma Certificate from NIELIT and they have further been promoted. 4. Meeting the submissions so advanced, learned counsel for the respondent-Commission submits that mere issuance of chargesheet does not amount to indictment of an employee and unless and until there is a plea taken in the petition that the chargesheet was not approved by the competent authority this Court would not interfere in the disciplinary proceedings as the disciplinary proceedings stands covered under the relevant statutory Rules. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent takes the same stand as learned counsel for the respondent-Commission. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, I find some substance in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that once the O-Level certificate had been duly verified, there was no reason to reopen the controversy inasmuch qua O-Level Certificate in Computer Operation. The only clinching point would be that this O-Level certificate was issued by the NIELIT had the curriculum requirement or not. This in my considered view can only be gone into by the Enquiry Officer in the event petitioner furnishes reply. In so far as the petitioner's stand as similarly situated employees have previously been appointed with the O-Level Certificate and have been further promoted, it is open for the petitioner to raise this plea of discrimination being meeted out in the matter of disciplinary proceedings. 6. I do not find anywhere from the pleadings raised in the writ petition that the chargesheet was not issued by the competent authority. I find merit in the submission advanced by learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the disciplinary proceedings stand governed under the relevant statutory Rules and hence, cannot be interfered at interlocutory stage as the employer has every right to initiate disciplinary proceedings and bring it to its logical end. It is always open for the employee to call for oral hearing in the departmental enquiry after submitting reply. 7. In view of the above, I decline to grant indulgence in the matter at this stage. However it is appropriate that in the event petitioner files a reply to the chargesheet within four weeks from today taking all available defence that he has taken before this Court as well as factual aspect with regard to similarly situated employees being given appointments and promotions, the disciplinary proceedings shall be concluded within a further period of two months. Needless to add that the disciplinary proceedings shall be conducted strictly in accordance with law following the procedure prescribed for under the relevant punishment and appeal rules. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Deepika Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad