Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20685 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 540 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shweta Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard Shri Tripathi B.G.Bhai, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has questioned the proceedings which is sought to be initiated at the instance of the Joint Development Commissioner/ Divisional Commissioner by order dated 09.12.2024. 3. The submission advanced before the Court is that the Joint Development Commissioner is neither the appointing authority, nor disciplinary authority of the petitioner, who holds the post of Block Development Officer and hence, proceedings sought to be drawn are absolutely illegal. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, meeting the submission so advanced by learned counsel appearing for petitioner, submits that this is only a letter written with regard to initiation of proceedings, if any, and there can be no cause of action as on date because under the relevant rules/ Discipline and Service Rules relate to Government Employees, the disciplinary authority would be only an authority for initiating proper disciplinary proceeding against an employee. He submits that since the petitioner was appointed by the order passed by the Secretary, Village Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh upon recommendation made by Public Service Commission against the post of Block Development Officer, it is out of question for any other authority to initiate disciplinary proceeding except by the appointing authority/ disciplinary authority or even higher authority and that too after proper approval of the charge sheet by the competent authority as per the relevant rules. 5. Having heard learned counsel for respective parties and having perused the records particularly the order impugned, I find that there are certain recommendations made with regard to the act and conduct of the petitioner which according to the recommending authority would be amounting to an act of misconduct but from the last part of the letter/ recommendation I find, it is made all subject to the appointing authority's approval who according to the order of appointment issued to the petitioner is the Secretary Village Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh. 6. 6. In such above view of the matter, therefore, the letter/ reference/ recommendation by the Joint Development Commissioner/ Divisional Commissioner itself cannot be taken to be an order initiating any disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner. Any proceeding against government employee can always and shall always be initiated only by the appointing authority/ disciplinary authority. 7. In such above view of the matter, therefore, I do not find there to be a good ground to grant indulgence in the matter. However, while I consign this petition to records, I may observe that any such proceedings which is in the nature of disciplinary proceeding shall be initiated against the petitioner only by competent authority under the relevant service rules and that too after approval of the charge sheet by the competent authority. 8. Subject to what has been observed, this petition stands consigned to records. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Nadeem Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad