IN RE: Mary ELLIS (2008)

 OPINION OF THE COURT

The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be reversed, with costs, and the petition dismissed in its entirety.

 Petitioner, employed as an eligibility examiner tasked with processing food stamp applications, consistently processed such applications in particularly late fashion, even after multiple warnings concerning her poor performance.   Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the penalty of termination shocks the judicial conscience (see Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233-234, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974] ).   We reiterate that the Appellate Division has no discretionary authority or interest of justice jurisdiction in this CPLR article 78 proceeding to review the penalty imposed by respondent Commissioner of the Westchester County Department of Social Services (see Matter of Torrance v. Stout, 9 N.Y.3d 1022, 1023, 852 N.Y.S.2d 8, 881 N.E.2d 1194 [2008];  Matter of Rutkunas v. Stout, 8 N.Y.3d 897, 899, 834 N.Y.S.2d 73, 865 N.E.2d 1239 [2007] ).

 On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, etc.

MEMORANDUM.

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES concur in memorandum.