Ramfer vs Collector / District Magistrate, ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11192 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 18
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2961 of 2023
 
Petitioner :- Ramfer
 
Respondent :- Collector / District Magistrate, District Gonda And Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anuj Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Heard.

The present petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-

(I) A Writ, order or direction in the nature certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 06.03.2023 passed by opposite party no. 1 in case no. 289/2023 Computerized no. D-202308300000289, under Section 212(2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, in the interest of justice.

(II) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding thereby directing the opposite party no. 1 to transfer the pending case of 2665 of 2022 "Ramfer Vs. State" under section 98(1) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before any other competent revenue court within shortest time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper and further dispose of such case within stipulated time, in the interest of justice."

While press the present petition, learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that Presiding Officer of concerned court is bias and the applicant would not get justice as such the petitioner file an application under Section 212(2) of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 before the opposite party no.1-Collector/District Magistrate, District Gonda to transfer the Case No. 2665 of 2022 pending before opposite party no. 2 to some other court of competent jurisdiction.

Elaborating this aspect, he further stated that the apprehension of the applicant is that he would not be provided justice by the court concerned, is just. Accordingly, in these circumstances the present petition is liable to be allowed and the Case No. 2665 of 2022 pending before opposite party no. 2, be transferred to some other court of competent jurisdiction.

It is settled principal of law that merely suspicion by the party that he will not get justice would not justify transfer. There must be a reasonable apprehension to that effect. Mere presumption of possible apprehension should not and ought not be the basis of transfer of any case from one court to another. It is only in very special circumstances, when such grounds are taken, the Court must find reasons exist to transfer a case, not otherwise. Reference can be made to the judgment dated 12.11.2014 passed in Transfer Application (Civil) No. 519 of 2014 (Amit Agarwal vs. Atul Gupta).

Considering the aforesaid in the light of settled principal of law on the issue, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present matter.

Accordingly, present application is rejected.

Order Date :- 17.4.2023/Jyoti/-