Brahmanand vs Board Of Revenue And 16 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 22198 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166149
 
Court No. - 49
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2879 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Brahmanand
 
Respondent :- Board Of Revenue And 16 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

1. Heard Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jitendra Narain Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no.1.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 26.05.2022 and transfer the Second Appeal No. 946/2020 (Computerized Case No. R2020097200946).

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he preferred a Second Appeal under Section 331 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act against the judgment and order dated 06.08.2020, which is pending for adjudication before the learned Board of Revenue at Lucknow (respondent no.1). He further submits that the final arguments in the appeal have already been concluded and the Appellate Court has reserved the order. The petitioner filed an application under Section 24(A) read with Section 151 C.P.C. for the transfer of the said appeal from the Board of Revenue at Lucknow to the Circuit Board at Meerut on the ground that the Circuit Court at Meerut is near to the house of the petition.

4. Learned Board of Revenue registered the said case as Case No. TA/2454/2021/Shamli under Section 24(A) read with Section 151 of C.P.C. and after hearing the parties, rejected the transfer case of the petitioner, vide order dated 26.05.2022. While rejecting the said transfer application, learned Board of Revenue has observed that since the final arguments have already been concluded and the judgment has been reserved, now at this stage, the said transfer application is nothing but a delaying tactic.

5. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the said writ petition on the ground that the present writ petition is nothing but a device to delay the final disposal of the appeal. He further submits that no cogent reason to justify the transfer has been raised by the petitioner in support of this prayer and the learned Board of Revenue has very rightly rejected the said transfer application.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, this Court is of the view that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order dated 26.05.2022 passed by the learned Board of Revenue (respondent no.1).

7. The present writ petition is devoid of merit.

8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a request that in the interest of justice a direction may be issued to the learned Board of Revenue (respondent no.1) to decide the pending Second Appeal No. 946/2020 expeditiously.

9. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection to the extent that if a direction is issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the case.

10. Considering the innocuous prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner only for the expeditious disposal of the Second Appeal, this Court without entering into the merits of the case, directs the learned Board of Revenue (respondent no.1) to decide the said appeal, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, unless there is any legal impediment.

11. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid direction.

Order Date :- 17.8.2023

Abhishek Gupta