Chandigarh, July 17 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court has ruled that it is the sole competent authority to decide whether disciplinary proceedings should be initiated against a superior judicial service officer. "The administrative setup of the high court is vested with sufficient discretionary powers to assess whether the material-such as the complaint, affidavit of the complainant and the judicial officer's response-is adequate to initiate disciplinary action," a bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel observed. The court made the observation while hearing a petition filed by a Ludhiana-based lawyer, who had sought to quash a February 2023 decision by a HC judge, acting as the administrative judge of Yamunanagar district. The judge had ordered closure of a preliminary enquiry into allegations made by petitioner against a judicial officer from the Haryana superior judicial service. The closure came after the administrative judge reviewed the officer's response and found it satisfactory. The petitioner challenged the judge's discretion in closing the enquiry and sought directions to state government to initiate disciplinary proceedings. He also requested that the issuance of an integrity certificate to the judicial officer be withheld in the meantime. The court, however, clarified that although superior judicial service appointments are made by the governor of the state, they are done in consultation with the HC exercising jurisdiction over the state. This system, the bench said, upholds the principle of judicial independence as outlined in Article 50 of the Constitution. Elaborating the process for handling such complaints, the bench said that whenever a written complaint is received about the conduct or performance of a judicial officer, it is dealt with according to established procedures. These procedures are based on rules set to govern such appoints or decisions of administrative committees of the HC. Once a complaint is received, the judicial officer is asked to respond to the allegations. After reviewing the response, the administrative judge conducts a preliminary enquiry to decide whether there is enough material to initiate disciplinary action or not. The bench said that the HC's administrative setup has full discretion to decide whether a complaint, along with complainant's affidavit and the judicial officer's response, provides enough grounds to start disciplinary proceedings. "In this case, a preliminary enquiry was conducted...and the administrative judge found no sufficient material to proceed and decided to close the proceedings...," bench added. "Once the complaint submitted on administrative side against a judicial officer is proceeded as per laid down norms, the decision to close preliminary enquiry is not amenable to judicial review, except in case of proven malafides, violation of any fundamental right .,"court said while dismissing the plea....